| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member | ||
| Mr. Lawrence Foster | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he did not know he was receiving a general discharge and believes that he should have been told why he was not getting an honorable discharge. He goes on to state that after his discharge he helped his father on the farm and then went to work at a petroleum company as a gang hand. He retired at the same company as a plant superintendent in 1986 and has been married to the same wife since 1953. He also states that he has been active in his community and church and has raised a family and would like to have his discharge upgraded. He also states that he has lost the sight of his eyes. In support of his application he submits documents showing that he has served as a deacon in a church and a past master of the Masons. He also provides a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri, which destroyed millions of service records. However, the DD Form 214 provided by the applicant shows:
He enlisted in Altus, Oklahoma, on 30 January 1948 for a period of 3 years. He completed his training and was transferred to Fort Kobbe, Panama, for duty as a wheeled vehicle driver.
He was involuntarily extended under Public Law 51 and served 3 years and 6 months of overseas service.
On 22 December 1951, while serving in the rank of private first class (PFC) with a date of rank (DOR) of 4 October 1951, he was discharged at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, under honorable conditions. under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-365. He had served 3 years, 10 months and 23 days of total active service and had no awards or decorations.
There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
Army Regulation 615-365, in effect at the time, served as the authority for the discharge of enlisted personnel at the convenience of the government. It states, in pertinent part, that an Honorable Discharge Certificate would be furnished when the individual had character ratings of at least “very good”, efficiency ratings of at least “excellent”, had not been convicted by a general court-martial, had not been convicted by more than one special court-martial, and had been favorably considered/recommended for award of the Good Conduct Medal by the commander. Individuals who do not qualify for an honorable discharge and who are not considered sub-standard personnel will be issued a General Discharge Certificate.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
2. Inasmuch as the Board does not have the benefit of reviewing the applicant’s records as they relate to his conduct and efficiency ratings during the period in question, it must presumed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that the applicant’s character of service was properly characterized in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time.
3. The Board finds that the absence of a Good Conduct Medal and the fact that he was separated in the rank of PFC were in themselves, at the time, sufficient to justify the award of a general discharge.
4. The Board commends the applicant for his post-service accomplishments; however, without having the benefit of viewing the applicant's service records, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his discharge over 50 years later.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___tk ___ __lf_____ ___mkp__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002082515 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/05/13 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | GD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1951/12/22 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR615-365 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | CONV OF GOVT |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 466 | 144.0400/A04.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009252
The applicant's complete military service records are not available to the Board for review. However, his partial reconstructed record and his DD Form 214 offer sufficient evidence for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. Army Regulation 615-360, in effect at the time, provided that an honorable discharge certificate would be furnished when the individual had character ratings of at least "very good," had efficiency ratings of at least "excellent," had not been...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006584
The applicants military records are not available to the Board for review. The applicant's reconstructed record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 29 October 1948 and was discharged on 30 May 1951 for the purpose of immediate reenlistment. With respect to the applicant's rank/grade, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was promoted to the permanent rank/grade of PV2/E-2 on 20 August 1953.
ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000035436
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his military records be corrected to show that he was given an honorable discharge. The letter of appreciation is addressed to the applicant in the grade of Recruit after nearly 2 years and 9 months of service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060574C070421
The applicant’s military records were not available to the Board for review. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case, particularly the separations documents in question, be corrected by amending the item numbers in the WD AGO 53-55 of the individual concerned, dated 7 September 1945, as indicated: Item 3 (grade) - corporal; Item 32 (battles and campaigns - Ardennes-Alsace; Central Europe; Normandy; Northern France; and Rhineland; Item 33 (awards and citations) -...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015936C080407
The applicant states, in effect, his 1951 DD Form 214 shows his blood type as "O" and his 1954 DD Form 214 shows his blood type as "AB" and that his 1954 separation document contains an entry that indicates he was not entitled to mustering out pay. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in 1973. The version of the regulation in effect at the time of the applicant's discharge stated that Item 38 would contain an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011728C080213
The applicants military records are not available to the Board for review. (It also appears that the regulatory authority should perhaps have been Army Regulation 615-360 (the normal discharge or release from active duty upon ETS) instead of Army Regulation 615-365. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. showing he was given an honorable discharge from the Army on 8 May 1950; b. issuing to him an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010969C080407
The applicant requests, in effect, that his record be corrected to show he was promoted to private first class (PFC) and that he be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal, for his qualifying honorable active duty service from 26 June 1943 through...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013824
The applicant requests, in effect, that his general discharge, under honorable conditions, be upgraded to honorable. The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074790C070403
Army Regulation 600-8-22 also provides, in pertinent part, that the Korean Service Medal (KSM) is a United Nations Service Medal (UNSM) that is awarded for service in Korea or its adjacent territorial waters during the period 27 June 1950 to 27 July 1954. Once the Korean War Service Medal has been authorized by the Department of the Air Force, the applicant may apply to this Board to add this foreign award to his DD Form 214. However, because of the absence of his awards, there is no way...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084691C070212
The above regulation also provides for award of the United Nations Service Medal. Once the Department of the Air Force has authorized the Korean War Service Medal, the applicant may apply to the Army Board For Correction of Military Records to have it added to his DD Form 214. a. awarding the applicant the National Defense Service Medal and the United Nations Service Medal, then adding these awards to the applicant's DD Form 214; and