BOARD DATE: 14 October 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140004369
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 his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states he was discharged due to discriminatory practices. He was only paid $78.00 a month when he entered the Army. He states the money he is now receiving from Social Security is not sufficient for him and his wife to live on.
3. The applicant provides no additional evidence 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 applicants 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 that the applicants records were lost or destroyed in that fire. The only records available to this Board are the applicants DD Forms 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) with effective dates of 2 December 1954 and 14 February 1958.
3. On 1 December 1952, he was inducted into the Army of the United States. He was released from active duty on 2 December 1954. On 1 May 1955, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.
4. On 14 February 1958, he was discharged by reason of unfitness (general) for undesirable habits or traits of character. He had served 9 months and 14 days of net active service this period that was characterized as under other than honorable conditions. The applicant was issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
5. A Military Basic Pay and Allowances Chart effective 1 April 1955 shows that an E-1 with less than 4 months in service was paid $78.00 a month; $83 a month with over 4 months in service; and $98 a month with over 2 years in service.
6. Army Regulation 635-208 (Personnel Separation, Discharge, Undesirable Habits and Traits of Character), then in effect, provided procedures and guidance in the elimination from the service enlisted personnel having undesirable habits and traits of character. This regulation provided that an enlisted person who gave evidence of undesirable habits and traits of character would be recommended for discharge because of undesirability. This regulation also provided that persons discharged because of undesirable habits or traits of character would be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate
(DD Form 258A).
7. 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. He contends he was discharged based on discriminatory practices in the Army. However, he provided no evidence to support his contention.
2. The pay chart for 1955 shows he was not paid any less than any other E-1 with the same amount of service as he had.
3. His issue concerning the amount of social security he is now receiving is not within the jurisdiction of the ABCMR. Therefore, he must contact the Social Security Administration concerning that issue.
4. Although the applicant's separation package was not available and the exact circumstances surrounding his discharge are not known, it is presumed that the Army's administrative processing of the applicant for discharge is correct. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.
5. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is determined that all requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Further, it is determined that the type of discharge and the reason for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
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) AR20140004369
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140004369
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008696
On 9 May 1958, the applicant's commander submitted a request that the applicant appear before a board of officers convened under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Undesirable Habits and Traits of Character) to determine if he should be separated from the Service. On 6 June 1958, the separation authority approved the report of proceedings of the board of officers, ordered the applicant's discharge, and ordered that he be furnished an Undesirable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019914
The applicant, the wife of a former service member (FSM), requests an upgrade of her husband's undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. The applicant's complete military records are not available to the Board for review. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004357
The applicants military records are not available to the Board for review. The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 24 February 1959 for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable and contended at that time that his discharge was unjust and unfair because of his prior service record. Therefore, absent evidence to show otherwise, there appears to be no basis to upgrade his discharge.
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 | CY2011 | 20110007939
The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general under honorable conditions discharge. He states that he was told at the time of his discharge that if he stayed out of trouble for six months his discharge would be changed to a general discharge. The board of officers recommended the applicant be discharged from the service because of undesirable habits or traits of character and that he be issued an undesirable discharge certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004272
On 13 March 1958, the separation authority approved his separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, for unfitness, and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. This regulation prescribed that an individual discharged for unfitness would be furnished an undesirable discharge, except when an honorable or a general discharge was warranted by the particular circumstances. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003113C070205
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 August 2006 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060003113 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 that he was not court-martialed, but he was taken before a board of officers. On 14 May 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), by unanimous vote, denied the applicant’s request for an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068951C070402
On 19 February 1959 the applicant’s commanding officer recommended that the applicant be required to appear before a board of officers to determine if he should be discharged for undesirable habits or traits of character under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. Counsel also called the board’s attention to the report of psychiatric evaluation, showing that the applicant had acted out against authority, which could be channeled by correct counseling. The applicant was discharged on...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004305
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to an honorable discharge. However, his reconstructed records contain his DD Form 214 and other documents which are sufficient for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005480
The examiner recommended that he appear before a Board of Officers to determine whether he should be discharged by reason of unfitness. Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations Unsuitability), also in effect at the time of the applicant's discharge, provided the policies, procedures, and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unsuitable for further military service. Had he been given a GD in accordance with the regulations at the time of...