BOARD DATE: 4 November 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100019783
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general discharge (GD).
2. The applicant states he served honorably in the Korean War, he was on the front lines, and he was awarded several medals. His problem was when he was stationed at Fort Knox, Kentucky. He would go home on the weekend and would forget to go back because he was in love. The Sunday before he was to be discharged charges were preferred against him for being disrespectful to a superior commissioned officer by not saluting him. He was given the option of fighting the charges, which people encouraged him to do, or get out of the military. He was in love; therefore, he decided to get out of the military.
3. The applicant does not provide any documents in support of his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant's military record is not available to the Board for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members records at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in 1973. It is believed that the applicant's records were lost or destroyed in that fire. However, there were sufficient documents on file for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. This case is being considered using reconstructed records, which primarily consist of the applicant's Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of The United States (DD Form 214).
3. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was inducted into the Army of the United States and entered active duty on 24 September 1952. This separation document also shows that during his active duty tenure he earned the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Korean Service Medal with one bronze service star, the National Defense Service Medal, and the United Nations Service Medal.
4. The applicant's DD Form 214 also shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 on 10 June 1955, with an undesirable discharge, after completing 1 year, 7 months, and 26 days of active military service with 386 days of time lost.
5. Army Regulation 615-368 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Undesirable Habits and Traits of Character), in effect at the time of the applicant's separation from active duty, provided policy and guidance in the elimination from the service of enlisted personnel having undesirable habits and traits of character. This document states that when an enlisted man gives evidence of habits or traits of character which serve to render his retention in the service undesirable, and his rehabilitation is considered impossible after repeated attempts to accomplish same have failed, his company or detachment commander will report the facts to the commanding officer.
6. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
7. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory, but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier's separation specifically allows such characterization.
8. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. The regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contention was carefully considered; however, there is no evidence and the applicant did not provide evidence or a convincing argument which would support upgrading his discharge.
2. The evidence of record shows that the applicant served on active duty from
24 September 1952 through 10 June 1955 and he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 for undesirable habits and traits of character with an undesirable discharge.
3. There is no evidence of record and the applicant provides insufficient evidence to show that the discharge he received was in error or unjust.
4. There is a presumption of administrative regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs. This presumption can be applied to any review unless there is substantial evidence to rebut the presumption. In this instance, the "presumption of regularity" is based on Army Regulation 615-368, which provides the processing procedures for separation and specific guidance in determining the character of service and description of separation. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it appears the applicant was properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the regulations in effect at that time, all requirements of law and regulations were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge.
5. 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. Therefore, in view of all of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___x_____ ___x____ ____x___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
_______ _ x _______ ___
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100019783
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100019783
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019683
The FSM's complete military records are not available to the Board for review. On 12 February 2013, the ABCMR considered his petition for a discharge upgrade but found no evidence of error or injustice and denied his request. The regulation stated that discharge, if recommended, would be for unfitness, except that discharge because of unsuitability (under Army Regulation 615-369 (Enlisted Personnel - Discharge - Inaptitude or Unsuitability)), without referral to another board, might be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005503
He returned to the Continental United States in March 1954. d. In September 1954, he was convicted by an SPCM for being AWOL from 12 June to 4 September 1954. e. In February 1955, he was convicted by an SPCM for being AWOL from 24 January to 16 February 1955. f. In March 1955, while in confinement, the FSMs commanding officer requested the FSM be required to appear before a board of officers convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080139C070215
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010738
The applicant requests, in effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded. The applicant had already exceeded the 15-year statute of limitations to petition the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge when he submitted his DD Form 293 to that board on 12 June 2006. Individuals discharged under this regulation would normally be issued an UD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009184
The applicant requests the characterization of service of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be upgraded from an undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. On 14 November 1954, his immediate commander requested a board of officers be convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - Discharge - Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)) for the purpose of determining the applicant's fitness for retention. On an unknown date in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | AR20080016711
The applicants military records are not available to the Board for review. On 9 September 1955 the applicant's unit commander requested a board of officers be convened to determine if the applicant should be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 for unfitness. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008071
On 15 July 1954, his immediate commander requested a board of officers be convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - Discharge - Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)) for the purpose of determining the applicant's fitness for retention. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 with an undesirable discharge. The regulation stated that discharge, if recommended, would be for unfitness,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004115
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 9 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070004115 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The records available to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records were provided in part by the applicant and from reconstructed records. On 14 August 1953, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120017703
The military medical officer stated the applicant was undesirable as a Soldier. On 18 January 1956, the applicant's immediate commander requested a board of officers be convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - Discharge - Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)) for the purpose of determining the applicant's fitness for retention. The board found him unfit for retention and recommended his discharge with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013335
While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. On 21 March 1955, the applicant's immediate commander requested a board of officers be convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - Discharge -...