BOARD DATE:	  4 November 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140003749 


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 an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

2.  The applicant states that he served in the Korean War and was awarded the Purple Heart.  He was promoted to the rank of corporal and he was a good Soldier.  One night he made a mistake when he got drunk and into a fight.  He was young and didn't want to be placed in confinement.  At the time, the Army only had a general discharge or an undesirable discharge.  He is now 80 years old and trying to receive medical care at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospital in Shreveport, LA.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) 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 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 service 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 that the applicant's records were lost or destroyed in that fire.  However, his DD Form 214 offers sufficient evidence for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.

3.  His DD Form 214 shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 March 1952 for a period of 3 years.  He was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368, on 29 March 1955, with an undesirable discharge.

   a.  It also shows he was –

* born in August 1933
* awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 1745 (Light Weapons Infantryman)
* awarded the –

 * Purple Heart
 * National Defense Service Medal
 * Korean Service Medal
 * United Nations Service Medal
 * Combat Infantryman Badge
 * 3 Overseas Bars

   b.  It further shows he –

* completed 1 year, 1 month, and 8 days of foreign service during the period 21 October 1952 to 28 November 1953
* completed 2 years, 7 months, and 21 days of total net service for pay purposes
* had 154 days of time lost
* was discharged in the rank of private/pay grade E-1

4.  There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a review of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

5.  Army Regulation 615-368, 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.
6.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  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.

	b.  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.

7.  Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) 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.  Considering the applicant successfully completed training and was awarded MOS 1745, his contention that he was young and in effect immature is not supported by the evidence of record.  Additionally, there is no evidence that indicates he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

2.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 29 March 1955 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 and issued an undesirable (under other than honorable conditions) discharge.

3.  The regulations governing the Board's operation require that the discharge process must be presumed to have been in accordance with applicable law and regulations unless the applicant can provide evidence to overcome that presumption.  The evidence provided by the applicant failed to overcome that presumption.

4.  During the period of service under review the applicant had 154 days 
(i.e., 5 months and 4 days) of time lost, he was discharged in pay grade E-1, and he failed to complete his 3-year enlistment obligation.  Thus, his record of service during the period under review did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel and he is not entitled to either an honorable or a general discharge.

5.  In view of all of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

6.  The ABCMR does not grant requests for discharge upgrades solely for the purpose of making an applicant eligible for veterans' benefits.  Every case is individually decided based upon its merits when an applicant requests a change in his or her discharge.  Additionally, granting veterans' benefits is not within the purview of the ABCMR.  Any questions regarding eligibility for such benefits should be addressed to the VA or appropriate government agency.

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)                                         AR20140003749



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140003749



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1