IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 22 May 2012
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110023449
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 be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states that he enlisted in the Regular Army in 1952 and served for almost 2 years and was unjustly given an undesirable discharge because he was unable to read.
3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States).
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 records are not available for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members' records at the NPRC in 1973. It is believed the applicant's records were lost or destroyed in that fire. However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.
3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in Columbus, Georgia on 11 February 1952. He completed his training and was transferred to Germany in August 1952.
4. On 9 October 1953 he was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 12 May to 1 September 1953.
5. On 10 March 1954 he was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 10 October 1953 to 29 January 1954.
6. All of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants administrative separation are not present in the available records; however, they do show that on 5 April 1954 the applicant appeared before a board of officers represented by counsel to determine if he should be discharged from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 for unfitness. The applicant declined to testify in his own behalf and the board of officer recommended that he be discharged with an undesirable discharge. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation of the board on 6 May 1954.
7. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 25 May 1954 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 for unfitness due to traits of character rendering retention in the service as undesirable. He had served 1 year, 4 months, and 10 days of active service and had 339 days of lost time.
8. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge to a general discharge. The ADRB denied his request on 12 March 1962.
9. Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness. That regulation provided for the discharge of individuals who had demonstrated their unfitness by giving evidence of habits and traits of character manifested by misconduct. An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicants administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate given the limited information contained in the available records.
3. Therefore, given the extensive amount of lost time and his otherwise undistinguished record of service, there appears to be no basis to upgrade his 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 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) AR20110023449
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110023449
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
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 | CY2013 | 20130002193
The applicants military records are not available to the Board for review. A DA Form 37 (Report of Proceedings of Board of Officers), dated 10 February 1955, shows a board of officers convened on 8 February 1955 and recommended separating the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men - Discharge - Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)). There is no evidence in the applicant's military service records and he has not provided evidence that shows...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015347
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 March 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110015347 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. However, the records show he was 17 years of age at the time of his enlistment and 19 years old at the time of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074741C070403
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. APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he finished his tour of duty and served 6 months of confinement, as a result of a special court-martial. On 14 January 1954, the applicant’s commander initiated a request to have the applicant appear before a board of officers to determine if he should be discharged under the provisions of Army...
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 | CY2010 | 20100016887
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The board determined the evidence presented showed the applicant had habits or traits of character which served to render his retention in the service undesirable and recommended he be discharged under Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men Discharge Unfitness) for unfitness. His service covered a period of for 2 years, 11 months, and 4 days of which 1 year, 11 months, and 28 days was creditable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002340
He goes on to state that upon release from the 97th General Hospital in Frankfurt, West Germany he was released from the Army and his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) reflects an undesirable discharge and it should read that he received an honorable discharge for medical reasons. The applicant's military records are not available for review. Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of...
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 | 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 | CY2015 | 20150001307
On 28 June 1953, the FSM's unit recommended a board of officers be convened to determine whether the FSM should be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Personnel - Discharge - Unfitness). The certificate, dated 12 June 1953, issued by the Psychiatry and Neurology Service, USAH, Camp Atterbury, essentially stated: * the FSM's diagnosis was anti-social personality manifested by immaturity, impulsive behavior, lack of adequate standards of behavior, and...