PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            9 February 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999028607

	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.  

	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that he be provided a complete and unconditional honorable discharge for his first period of service from 13 January 1951 through 16 November 1954; and that his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) for the period 17 November 1954 to 14 October 1957. 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he served honorably along the Demilitarized Zone in Korea during his first term of service, and this service should be appropriately recognized.  He also states that the time he spent in the stockade, for the fight with an noncommissioned officer that took place after duty hours and resulted in his discharge from his second term of service, should have been punishment enough for that offense and should have not resulted in an BCD.  In addition, he claims he has been a good citizen since his discharge in 1957 and is now disabled and in need of assistance with upgrades to both his separations. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 13 January 1951 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years and voluntarily extended that service.  On 16 November 1954, the applicant was honorably discharged, in the rank of private/E-2, for the purpose of reenlistment.  On 17 November 1954, while at Camp Wood, Japan, he reenlisted for 6 years.  

5.  There are only partial records available for this review; however, there is a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) which was signed by the applicant.  This document contains the authority and reason for the applicant’s BCD discharge as Army Regulation 635-204 by reason of court-martial conviction.  It also shows that he received an HD for his completed period of service from 13 January 
1951 through 16 November 1954, and that he had completed 1 year, 6 months, and 9 days of foreign service.

6.  The specific facts and circumstances surrounding the events which led to the applicant’s discharge from the Army are not contained in the available records.  The DD Form 214 does show that the applicant received a BCD as a result of a general court-martial conviction and that he had accrued 186 days of time lost.  There is no indication in any of the documents contained in the record that the applicant had any disciplinary problems during his first period of service.

7.  Army Regulation 635-204, in effect at the time, provided the policy for ensuring that enlisted members who were confined in a foreign penal institution be returned to the United States prior to being separated under the terms of their sentence.  A BCD or Dishonorable Discharge were considered appropriate punitive discharges as a result of a general court-martial conviction.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board noted the applicant’s contentions that he has been a good citizen since his discharge and that his discharge was too harsh at the time.  However, while the Board congratulates the applicant on his post service conduct, these contentions provide no basis for relief.

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army.  However, the Board did note that there was a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) on file, which was authenticated by the applicant.  This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the Board presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  Therefore, the Board concluded that recharacterization of the applicant’s last period of service is not warranted. 

3.  Conversely, in view of the overall length and honorable quality of the applicant’s first period of service, the Board found it would be appropriate to consider his honorable discharge of 16 November 1954 a complete and unconditional separation.  To do otherwise would work an injustice on the applicant by possibly denying him the right to VA benefits he earned as a result of his first complete period of honorable service.  

4.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, and in recognition of his previous years of good service, it would be appropriate and proper to consider the applicant’s honorable discharge of 16 November 1954 as a complete and unconditional separation from military service.  The applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was eligible for a complete and unconditional separation from military service at the time of his honorable discharge on 16 November 1954.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__cjs___  ___dsj__  ___rvo___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028607	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/02/09	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1957/10/14	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-204	
DISCHARGE REASON	GCM Conviction	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PARTIAL 	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 189	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.