BOARD DATE: 24 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002277 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ __x______ __x___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 24 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002277 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 24 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002277 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 an upgrade of his general discharge under honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states he is 85 years old and has survived cancer (though he is not certain all of the cancer was removed). Before he dies, he would like his discharge upgraded to honorable. a. He served his country honorably and was wounded in combat. He graduated near the top of his officer candidate school (OCS) class. He reached a point in his career where his combat service was no longer considered a plus; he was expected instead to have a college degree. He did not have a college degree so he elected to get out. b. He does not understand all of the "secret codes" listed on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), and he was told a fire destroyed his records in 1973. He has a grandson who is following in his footsteps and, with no encouragement, he brags about the applicant's military service. c. Even though his discharge was under honorable conditions, he feels he was owed more. He was a very happy enlisted Soldier who had served 8 years and earned rank on the battlefield. He was wounded, patched up, and sent back to the front lines, but he never received a Purple Heart. At his family's insistence, he applied for the Purple Heart and received it about 4 years ago. d. The Army was downsizing after the end of the Korean War, which meant it was nearly impossible to be promoted to master sergeant. Like many others, he applied to OCS. He was stationed in Germany at the time and his orders for OCS did not arrive in time, so he shipped his family ahead to Fort Lewis, WA. He left for Fort Benning, GA once he received his orders for OCS. e. He graduated from OCS near the top of his class and was reassigned to Fort Campbell, KY. All of the moving around took a toll on his wife and kids. After serving 18 months as an officer, he faced another period of Army downsizing, where combat experience was no longer valued. Instead, the focus was on having a college education. Needless to say, he took the option to be discharged. When he received his DD Form 214, he was both surprised and hurt. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, ending 23 December 1957 and his General Discharge Certificate. 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 applicant's complete military records are not available for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members' records at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in 1973. The Army personnel records affected dated between November 1912 and January 1960. It is believed his records were lost or destroyed in that fire. However, a reconstructed record from NPRC, that includes his separation orders, and the DD Form 214 he provides, are sufficient to address the applicant's request. 3. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was commissioned as an officer in the U.S. Army Reserve and entered active duty on 21 August 1956 based on his graduation from OCS. 4. His reconstructed record contains Special Orders Number 299, dated 18 December 1957, issued by the 101st Airborne Division and Fort Campbell, that shows he was to be released from active duty and his assignment to Company A, 1st Airborne Battle Group, 501st Infantry, and discharged under honorable conditions (general). The reason for separation was elimination by a Department of the Army (DA) Elimination Selection Board. 5. He was discharged under honorable conditions on 23 December 1957. He completed 1 year, 2 months, and 20 days of net active service, with 8 years, 3 months, and 2 days of other service; he had 5 years and 7 months of foreign/sea service. a. His DD Form 214 shows: * rank at discharge was second lieutenant * separation authority: DA Letter AGPO-SC, dated 26 November 1957; Section II (Elimination of Officers with Less than 3 years' Service), Army Regulation (AR) 635-105A (Personnel Separations – Elimination) * Separation Program Number (SPN) 55N (authority: section 248, Armed Forces Reserve Act of 1952; reason: administrative discharge) * entered active duty at Fort Benning; discharge was effected at Fort Campbell * his last duty assignment was with Company A, 1st Airborne Battle Group, 501st Infantry b. He was awarded or authorized: * Combat Infantryman Badge * Purple Heart * Good Conduct Medal (2nd Award) * Korean Service Medal * United Nations Service Medal * Army of Occupation of Medal (Germany) * Army of Occupation Medal (Japan) * National Defense Service Medal * Parachutist Badge c. He incurred wounds as a result of action with enemy forces on 4 February 1951 at Ochon-ni, Korea. REFERENCES: 1. Public Law 476 (Armed Forces Reserve Act of 1952), chapter 6 (Separations), section 248 states the discharge of Reserve component commissioned officers shall be effected at the pleasure of the President, and the discharge of other members of the reserve component shall be in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the Army. 2. AR 635-105A, in effect at the time, provided a means to eliminate substandard and unsuitable officers from the Army. a. Section II applied to officers with less than 3 years commissioned service based upon reasons that included failure of a basic service school course and failure to be considered fully qualified for promotion to first lieutenant. b. The Adjutant General received recommendations for the elimination of selected officers and would refer these officers to a board. The board's role was to determine whether the reason for elimination was established. The board could recommend the officer be retained or require the officer to show cause for retention. 3. AR 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. a. Paragraph 2-9 contains guidance on the burden of proof. It states, in pertinent part, that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity, which is that what the Army did was correct. b. The ABCMR is not an investigative body and decides cases based on the evidence that is presented in the military records provided and the independent evidence submitted with the application. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant's discharge packet is not available for review, but his separation orders reflect he was referred to a DA administrative elimination board and his case appears to have been given due consideration; the board apparently recommended separation. 2. Despite the absence of his complete military records, the presence of his DD Form 214 suggests the requirements of law and regulations were met prior to his separation. Given this, it is presumed the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process, and the applicant submits no evidence that would suggest otherwise. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002277 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002277 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2