MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           22 August 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002068557

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Carolyn G. Wade		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Lutz		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:  In effect, that his Blue Discharge be upgraded to honorable in order to qualify for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he served his country for three years during World War II; that he served until he was released from the service; and that his discharge papers show no indication of dishonorable service.  He states that he was told that his discharge would be upgraded to honorable in 5 years.  He states that he was young, confused, frightened, and did not speak much English when he realized he had made a mistake by going AWOL.  He is now seeking an upgrade of his discharge to qualify for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits.

In support of his request, the applicant submitted several letters attesting to his character as well as a letter from the VA.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were partially lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Information herein was obtained from the applicant's WD AGO Form 53-56 and remaining official military personnel file.

Of Hispanic decent, he was born on 5 April 1925 and inducted in the Army of the United States on 24 August 1944.  Following completion of all military training, the applicant departed the United States on 1 April 1945 and arrived in Belgium on an unknown date.  He departed Belgium on an unknown date and arrived in the United States on 30 June 1945.  

On 2 August 1945, while assigned to Camp Beale, California, the applicant departed his unit in an absent without leave (AWOL) status and remained AWOL until civil authorities apprehended him on 29 September 1946.  He returned to military control on 8 October 1946.  He was confined to Fort Rosecrans, San Diego, California, until he was discharged with a Blue Discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-300 on 11 March 1947.  He was credited with 2 years, 3 months, and 17 days of active military service and 435 days of lost time.  

There is no evidence of record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) within its 15-year statue of limitations for an upgrade of his discharge.

The so-called "Blue Discharge" was the WD AGO Form 53-56 (Discharge From the Army of the United States - Enlisted Record and Report of Separation).  The version referred to herein was in use between 1 November 1944 and 1 July 1947 and was printed on blue paper, hence the name "Blue Discharge."  It was an uncharacterized separation, being neither honorable nor dishonorable.  It was issued to soldiers whose service was not dishonorable, but who were not entitled to a "testimonial of honest and faithful service" as indicated by an honorable discharge.  The Blue Discharge was given to enlisted members for a variety of reasons, to include:  minority (under age); fraudulent enlistment or induction; inaptness; lack of adaptability for military service; habits or traits of character rendering retention in the service not desirable; being physically disqualified for service; "desertion and physical unfitness;" civil confinement; and disability not incurred in the line of duty.

Army Regulation 615-300, then in effect, provided for the administrative discharge of enlisted men who were guilty of desertion or aggravated AWOL and who were primarily fit for military service.

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.  The applicant's contention that he served his country for 3 years during World War II is incorrect, as is his service computation on his WD AGO Form 53-56.  Given the date of his induction into the Army of the United States, his AWOL period, and his date of separation, the applicant actually had only 1 year, 4 months, and 14 days of creditable service and 432 days of lost time due to AWOL.

2.  The applicant stated that he was young, confused, frightened, and spoke little English as the reason for his going AWOL.  The Board does not accept this argument.  The applicant was 19 years old when inducted and 20 years old when he went AWOL.  He was no younger or less frightened than many millions of his countrymen who served honorably without going AWOL for more than 1 year.  Likewise, he was not unique as a non-English speaking soldier, and the Board does not accept this as a mitigating factor for his misconduct.

3.  The applicant was discharged with a Blue Discharge.  This is an uncharacterized separation, being neither honorable nor dishonorable.  It was issued to soldiers whose service was not dishonorable, but who were not entitled to a "testimonial of honest and faithful service" as indicated by an honorable discharge.  

4.  After a thorough review of the applicant's records and documents submitted with his application, the Board concluded that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence 

demonstrating that either the Army's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated his misconduct or poor duty performance.  The Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

5.  The record does not support, and the applicant has not presented any evidence, that he was told that his discharge would automatically be upgraded.  Furthermore, the Army does not have a policy that automatically upgrades discharges.

6.  The Board congratulates the applicant on his successful transition to civilian life and his good post-service conduct.  However, in review of the applicant's entire service record, the Board found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  

7.  The Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining VA benefits.  Furthermore, determining eligibility for veteran's benefits does not fall within the purview of this Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

8.  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 this requirement.

9.  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

__jhl___  __rvo___  __bjl____  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002068557	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020822	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BLUE (UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19470311	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 615-300 & 615-366	
DISCHARGE REASON	A71.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.9405	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.