BOARD DATE: 7 February 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120007630
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 the narrative reason for his discharge be changed from the convenience of the Government to a medical discharge.
2. He states, in effect:
a. his discharge action was mishandled. While he was in Tripler Army Hospital in Hawaii in November 1951 he was coerced into signing a paper to agreeing to be discharged because he had an eye infection from chlorine. The chlorine caused his eyes to close-up while he was learning to swim and his eyes could have been corrected;
b. he volunteered for the service, he needed the service, and he still needs it; and
c. his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) shows he was discharged "for the Convenience of the Government." He was a cook by trade and he wanted a job cooking, but the Army refused him.
3. He provides his DD Form 214.
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 personnel records were not available and may have been lost or destroyed in a fire at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973. The only record available to the Board was the DD Form 214 provided by the applicant, which was signed by him.
3. His DD Form 214 shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 July 1951 for a period of 3 years. He completed 3 months and 12 days of foreign service.
4. On 5 January 1952, he was honorably discharged under the provisions of Special Regulation 615-360 (Enlisted Men Discharge: Release from Active Duty) for the Convenience of the Government by reason of physical disability existing prior to entry on active service and not aggravated by military service. He completed 5 months and 5 days of creditable active service.
5. His service record is void of and he did not provide any medical documentation.
6. Special Regulation 615-360 in effect at the time, stated enlisted men would be discharged for the convenience of the Government by authority of the Secretary of War only. Such authority would be given either in each individual case or by an order application to all cases of a class specified in the order.
7. Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. The unfitness must be of such a degree that a Soldier is unable to perform the duties of his/her office, grade, rank, or rating in such a way as to reasonably fulfill the purposes of his/her employment on active duty.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The available records do not include any evidence which supports the applicant's contentions regarding his eye infection or that he was coerced into signing his discharge paper.
2. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged for the Convenience of the Government by reason of physical disability existing prior to entry into active service and not aggravated by military service.
3. The available evidence is void of facts and circumstances pertaining to the events which led to his discharge. However, he provided a DD Form 214 signed by him that documents the characterization and reason for the discharge. Absent evidence to the contrary, especially after the passage of 60 years, regularity in the discharge process must be presumed.
4. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence that would warrant granting the applicant's requested relief.
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) AR20120007630
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120007630
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017976
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 April 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070017976 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 applicant states the recommendation by a military physician who wrote his clinical abstract, that he be separated from active duty under the provisions of SR 615-360-40, should have been accepted. SR 615-450-10,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013960
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant's military record is not available to the Board for review. The evidence of record does not support the applicant's request for correction of his DD Form 214 to show he was discharged for a disability incurred during his military service.
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 | 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 | 20090004224
The applicant requests that his service in Korea and his service in Germany be included on his DD Forms 214 (Reports of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States). Therefore, his records should be corrected to show this award. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding the applicant the Army Good Conduct Medal for exemplary service for the period 5 March 1951 through 4 March 1953; and b....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003779C070205
The applicant requests that he be awarded the Purple Heart and that his report of separation (DD Form 214) be corrected to reflect his time as a Prisoner of War (POW). Medical documents prepared at the time of his repatriation on 15 August 1953 clearly indicate that the applicant was wounded on the date of his capture by enemy forces in Korea on 27 April 1951. After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service, the Board has determined that the applicant should have received the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002085638C070215
The regulation states that an individual separated under this regulation will be furnished an honorable or general discharge. The Board considered the applicant's request to change his discharge to Army Regulation 615-365 or Army Regulation 615-360. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that the reason and authority for separation issued to him was in error or unjust.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020240
The applicant, the widow of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests: * removal of the entry for time lost in item 38 (Remarks) of the FSM's DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) for the period ending 5 September 1953 * award of the Purple Heart for injuries the FSM received while serving in Korea 2. The applicant provides several letters from the FSM sent to her while he was in Korea. In this case, there is no evidence of material error or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011088
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 December 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110011088 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The DD Form 214 she was issued at the time shows in item 8 (Reason and Authority for Separation) the entry "ETS (AR 615-30)" that indicates she was discharged at the expiration of her term of service (ETS) under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 615-360. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005806
The applicant contends the Board made its decision based on inaccurate information: * his eye examination was normal for his entrance examination and abnormal for his separation examination * he denies that he requested to be discharged from the military * he did not waive his right to have his case considered by a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) * he did not concur with the Medical Evaluation Boards (MEBs) findings and recommendations * his medical condition did not exist prior to service...