IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  20 September 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110005079 


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, in effect, an upgrade of his general discharge.

2.  The applicant states he feels an honorable discharge is in order.  He was released from the Army after serving in Korea because he had medical problems in which his weight dropped from 215 to 120.  He had major problems eating and sleeping as a result of combat in the jungle and Korea.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) and a Statement of Service.

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 applicant's 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 applicant's 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 records are not available to the Board for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members' records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed his records were lost or destroyed in that fire.  However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.  This case is being considered using a reconstructed record, which primarily consists of his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he entered active duty in Pittsburgh, PA, on 31 January 1952.  This form also shows that at the time of his separation he held military occupational specialty 4745 (Light Vehicle Driver) and his most significant assignment was with the 505th Transportation Truck Company.

4.  He completed 1 year, 1 month, and 20 days of active service, of which 8 months, and 2 days was foreign service.  He was awarded or authorized the Korean Service Medal with bronze service star, United Nations Service Medal, and Combat Infantryman Badge.

5.  The facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge are not available for review with this case.  However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 20 March 1953 under the provisions of paragraph 2 of Army Regulation 615-369 (Enlisted Men – Discharge – Inaptness, Lack of Required Degree of Adaptability, or Enuresis).  He was furnished a General Discharge Certificate.  

6.  There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

7.  Army Regulation 615-369, in effect at the time, provided for the discharge of personnel found to be inapt, did not possess the required degree of adaptability for the military service, or were disqualified for service because of enuresis.  This regulation provides, in pertinent part, that when a Board of Officers has recommended that an enlisted man be discharged and the conduct of that enlisted man during his current period of service has been such as would render his retention in the service undesirable regardless of his inaptness, lack of required adaptability for military service, or enuresis, he will be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men – Discharge – Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)).

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation), currently in effect, governs the policies and procedures for the separation of enlisted personnel.  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 member's 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his general discharge should be upgraded.

2.  The applicant's available record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army.  However, his record contains a copy of his DD Form 214 which shows he was discharged on 20 March 1953 with a general discharge.  This document listed the authority for his separation as Army Regulation 615-369.

3.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time and there is no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.  Additionally, it must also be presumed that the character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

4.  Based on the available records, his service does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to upgrade his discharge to an honorable discharge.

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 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)                                         AR20110005079



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110005079



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1