PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           11 February 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12847
                                              AR1998012268

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

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		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 that his name be changed and that his general discharge be upgraded.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that at the time he entered the Army his legal last name was “Brooks” but he was using the last name of “Parker” and he would like to have his discharge documents changed to reflect his legal name.  He also requests that his discharge be upgraded.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his social security account number (SSAN) card.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that the applicant enlisted in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with parental consent on 14 November 1969 for a period of 2 years.  At the time of his enlistment, he, his mother, and the recruiter authenticated a statement of name change (DA Form 3284-R) indicating that the applicant’s birth certificate listed his last name as “Brooks” and that it had not been legally changed through any court proceedings.  However, he preferred to use the last name of “Parker”, a name he had used since birth.  Consequently, he enlisted under the last name of “Parker”.

5.  He successfully completed his basic training at Fort Bragg, North Carolina and was transferred to Fort Ord, California on 2 February 1970 to attend advanced individual training (AIT).  While attending AIT he was convicted by a summary court-martial on 24 March 1970 of shoplifting from the post exchange and willfully disobeying a lawful order.  He was sentenced to be reduced to the pay grade of E-1, to be confined at hard labor for 20 days, and to a forfeiture of pay,

6.  The applicant went AWOL from 4 May to 2 June 1970 and was convicted by a summary court-martial on 18 June 1970.  His sentence consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, confinement at hard labor for 1 month, and a forfeiture of pay.

7.  The applicant again went AWOL on 5 August 1970 and remained absent until he surrendered to FBI authorities in Philadelphia on 9 March 1972.  At the time he surrendered to the FBI he informed them that the SSAN he was serving under was one he had made up and at that time he provided a legal SSAN issued under the last name of “BROOKS.”

8.  The applicant was returned to military authorities at Fort Meade, Maryland and charges were preferred against him.  After consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by             court-martial.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

9.  The appropriate authority approved his request on 2 May 1972 and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

10.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 2 May 1972 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 9 months and 6 days of total active service and had a total of 588 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  He was discharged under the last name of “PARKER” with the SSAN he had originally provided.

11.  The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 23 April 1975 for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable, a change of his name to “Brooks”, and correction of his SSAN.  He cited at that time that he enlisted in the Army at 16 years of age and that he had assumed his step-fathers last name when he entered the Army.  He provided a birth certificate showing that he was born in January 1953.   The ADRB determined that the applicant’s age at the time of entry was below acceptable standards and elected to upgrade his discharge to a general discharge on 13 June 1977.

12.  The applicant again applied to the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP).  The ADRB again reviewed his case and determined on 27 April 1978 that his discharge should be affirmed but that his conduct and overall record of service did not warrant further upgrade of his discharge. 

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of the regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although it is normally not the policy of the Board to change the name or SSAN of individuals after they have been discharged; but instead to include the legal documents in the records to document the change.  However, in this case the individual made it known at the time that he enlisted that his legal last name was in fact “Brooks” and that it had not been legally changed.  Nevertheless, the Army accepted his enlistment in a name other than his legal name.

2.  Additionally, the evidence of record shows that the applicant provided a false SSAN while in the service and that he in fact obtained an SSAN under his legal name.  Inasmuch as a SSAN is only issued in legal names, it must be presumed that the Department did not require the applicant to provide proper proof of his SSAN at the time it was recorded in his records.

3.  While it is incumbent on the Department to document the applicant’s service in the name in which he served, the Board finds that in light of the circumstances in this case, it would be in the interest of justice to issue the applicant new separation documents to show that he was discharged under honorable conditions on 2 May 1972 under his legal last name of “Brooks” with the SSAN that is indicated on his SSAN card.  It was also be appropriate to enter in the remarks section of his DD Form 214 the name and SSAN he served under.

4.  In regards to the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable, the Board finds that his discharge as upgraded by the ADRB is proper and that considering his short length of service and overall undistinguished record of service, there is no basis to warrant further upgrade of his discharge.

5.  In view of the foregoing, 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 issuing new general discharge separation documents to the individual concerned in his legal name (BROOKS) and the SSAN indicated on his SSAN card to show that he was discharged under honorable conditions on 2 May 1972; and by showing in the remarks section of his separation documents the name and SSAN in which he served.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__inw___  ___vbc__  ________  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12847/AR1998012268	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990211	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	( GD,)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1972/05/02	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, CH10. . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY CM	
BOARD DECISION	( GRANT )	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.144.70	CH10	
2.100.01	NAME	
3.100.09	SSAN	
4.		
5.		
6.