MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            21 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025388

	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.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Ms. Debra Williams		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was unjustly given a general discharge that was supposed to be subsequently upgraded to an honorable discharge.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center at St. Louis, Missouri which destroyed millions of service records.  However, information contained in reconstructed records and documents provided by the applicant show:

The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army at Fort Sheridan, Illinois on 20 December 1945 and served until he was honorably discharged at Camp Kilmer, New Jersey after returning from the European Theater of Operations (ETO) on 19 June 1947.

On 22 April 1948 he again enlisted in the Regular Army at Rock Island, Illinois for a period of 3 years.  He served in Japan and Korea and was awarded the Army of Occupation Medal with Germany and Japan clasps, the Korean Service Medal with one silver service star, the Commendation Ribbon with metal pendant, the World War II Victory Medal, the United Nations Service Medal, the Korea Presidential Unit Citation Badge, and the Combat Infantryman Badge.

On 27 May 1952 he was separated under honorable conditions at Fort Devens, Massachusetts and was issued a General Discharge Certificate.  He had served 3 years and 9 months of service during his latest enlistment and had 126 days of lost time.

There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 615-360, in effect at the time, served as the authority for the discharge of enlisted personnel on the expiration of their term of service.  It states, in pertinent part, that an Honorable Discharge Certificate would be furnished when the individual had character ratings of at least “very good”, efficiency ratings of at least “excellent”, had not been convicted by a general court-martial, had not been convicted by more than one special court-martial, and had been favorably considered/recommended for award of the Good Conduct Medal by the commander.  Individuals who do not qualify for an honorable discharge and who are not considered sub-standard personnel will be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  Inasmuch as the Board does not have the benefit of reviewing the applicant’s records as they relate to his conduct and efficiency ratings during the period in question, it must presumed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that the applicant’s character of service was properly characterized in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time.

3.  The Board finds that the absence of a Good Conduct Medal and the fact that he had 126 days of lost time were in themselves sufficient to justify the award of a general discharge. 

4.  The applicant’s contention that his discharge was supposed to be automatically upgraded is without merit.  There are not now nor have there been any provisions for an automatic upgrade of discharges.  In every instance involving upgrades, an application is required to the boards that have the authority to do so. 

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

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___hof __  __mw___  __dw____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025388	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/12/21	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1952/05/27	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR615-365	
DISCHARGE REASON	144.0300/ETS	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  455 	144.0300/A03.00	
2.  458 	144.0303/A03.03	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.