IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  6 March 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140011746 


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 reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  He went into the Army in 1952 at Camp Chaffee, AR.  He completed basic training and he was given 7 days of leave.  He overstayed his leave by 2 or 3 days.  He was supposed to go to Fort Benning, GA for airborne training but he did not make it to Fort Benning.  He was given more leave and again overstayed his leave by 8 days.  He went to Camp Stone, CA, and he was put in the stockade on a boat.  It wasn't until the boat was far out that he was given some freedom.  He stayed on the boat for 13 to 14 days.

	b.  He was sent to Korea for 13 months.  The peace treaty was being signed and he was given 30 days of leave.  He overstayed his leave and then went to Fort Sill, OK.  The unit first sergeant kept an eye on him and followed him as if he was a criminal.  One of the sergeants wanted to get him.  While in the field on guard duty, everyone was allowed a rest period except him.  He was forced to go to the field without any rest.  When he came back, he participated in a boxing team.  The next day, the sergeant took him off the boxing team.  On the last day in the field, he was working around the area when the lieutenant restricted him to the area.  The next day, military police showed up and took him to the stockade without explanation.  He was then taken to the courthouse, again with no explanation and for no reason.  He did not do anything to cause trouble.  He knew nothing could be done at that point. 
3.  The applicant provides National Archives and Records Administration (NA) Form 13038 (Certification of Military Service). 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20130015808, dated 24 April 2014.  

2.  The applicant provides a new argument that warrants consideration by the Board. 

3.  His 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 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.

4.  His Certification of Military Service shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 February 1952 and he was discharged on 23 November 1954.  He received an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. 

5.  Special Orders (SO) Number 227, issued by Headquarters, Artillery Center, Fort Sill, on 19 November 1954 ordered his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 (Enlisted Men-Discharge-Unfitness (Undesirable Habits or Traits of Character)) by reason of unfitness with an undesirable discharge effective 23 November 1954. 

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 615-368, 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.  Unfitness included habits and traits of character manifested by antisocial or amoral trend, chronic alcoholism, criminalism, drug addiction, pathological lying, homosexuality, sexual perversion, or misconduct.  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.


8.  Army Regulation 615-368 also stated that a board of officers would recommend that the individual either be discharged because of unfitness or unsuitability, or retained in the service.  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 recommended in borderline cases if military circumstances and the character of service rendered by the individual during his current period of service so warranted.  As examples, such circumstances would apply where the cause of unfitness had been minor, relative to the length of efficient service or where there had been a definite effort at self control; or where an individual had, during his current period of service, distinguished himself by an act of heroism, which in itself reflected great credit on the individual and the military service.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel) governs the separation of enlisted personnel. 

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier'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 states 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.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The complete facts and circumstances surrounding his discharge are not available for review with this case.  However, his NA Form 13038, together with SO Number 227, shows he was discharged on 23 November 1954 under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368 with an undesirable discharge.

2.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it appears the applicant had a history of misconduct that led his chain of command to recommend his separation.  It is presumed his administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  It is also presumed the separation authority appropriately directed the issuance of an undesirable discharge based on his overall record of service during the period under review.

3.  Based on his available record, his service appears not to have met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct also renders his service unsatisfactory.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to grant him the 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20130015808, dated 24 April 2014.



      ____________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)                                         AR20140011746



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140011746



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1