MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:           9 September 2003                   
		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003090770

	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. Victoria A. Donaldson		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan		Member	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the time he was missing from active service was because he was in the Texas Department of Corrections and in the Missouri Department of Corrections.  The applicant continues that he was told while he was in Texas that he would be discharged from the Army on a "206-K" [Board is unfamiliar with this reference] discharge.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted on 2 April 1970 for a period of three years.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was assigned to the 194th Maintenance Company.  He was promoted to specialist (E-4) on 28 June 1971.

The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows the following entries in block 44 [Time Lost Under Section 927,Title 10, United States Code and Subsequent to Normal Dates ETS]:  1 June 1970 through 1 June 1970, 
1 day absence with out leave (AWOL); 17 September 1970 through 26 October 1970, 40 days AWOL; 11 August 1971 through 12 August 1971, 2 days AWOL; 13 October 1971 through 26 October 1971, 14 days AWOL; 3 November 1971 through 17 November 1971, 15 days AWOL; 21 November 1971 through 27 November 1971, 7 days AWOL and 30 November 1971 dropped from the rolls.

On 27 October 1971, nonjudicial punishment was imposed on the applicant for AWOL for the periods 30 September 1971 through 4 October 1971 and 13 October 1971 through 27 October 1971.  His punishment consisted of reduction to private first class (E-3), 14 days extra duty, restriction to the company area and church of choice for 14 days (suspended for 30 days) and forfeiture of $42.00 for a period of one month.

On 18 November 1971, nonjudicial punishment was imposed on the applicant for AWOL for the period 3 November 1971 through 18 November 1971.  His punishment consisted of reduction to private (E-2), 30 days extra duty ending 18 December 1971, and restriction to the company area and church of choice for 30 days.

ADMINCEN Form 1966-3 (Enlisted Statement-Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service), dated 7 April 1975 and signed by the applicant, shows that the applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Presidential Proclamation Number 4313.

The applicant indicated in his request that he understood he would be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate; that he would be deprived of all service benefits, that he would be ineligible for all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA); and that he may deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.  He acknowledged that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an undesirable discharge.  He also acknowledged that within 15 days of the date of receipt of the Undesirable Discharge Certificate, he must report to his State Director of Selective Retention to arrange for performance of alternate service.  He further indicated that he understood that satisfactory completion of such alternate service would be acknowledged by issuance of a Clemency Discharge Certificate; however, this certificate would not alter his ineligibility for any benefits predicated upon his military service.

ADMINCEN Form 1966-5 (Reaffirmation of Allegiance and Pledge to Complete Alternate Service), dated 7 April 1975, shows that the applicant pledged to complete 23 months of alternate service.

Accordingly, on 7 April 1975, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Presidential Proclamation Number 4313. He had served 1 year, 5 months and 11 days of total active service with 1220 days of lost time due to AWOL and civil confinement.

On 9 July 1975, the applicant was terminated from enrollment in the Reconciliation Service Program because he did not complete his required period of alternate service (the applicant signed a statement declining further participation in the program citing that he was going to work in farming).

The Army Discharge Review Boards Agency (ADRB) denied the applicant's request for upgrade to an honorable discharge on 2 November 1981.  The ADRB determined that the applicant's discharge was proper and equitable and that the discharge was properly characterized as under other than honorable conditions.

Presidential Proclamation 4313, issued on 16 September 1974, provided for the issuance of a clemency discharge to certain former soldiers, who voluntarily entered into and completed an alternate public work program specifically designated for former soldiers who received a less than honorable discharge for AWOL related incidents between August 1964 and March 1973.  Under this proclamation, eligible deserters were given the opportunity to request discharge for the good of the service with the understanding that they would receive an undesirable discharge.  Upon successful completion of the specified alternative service, the deserter was issued a clemency discharge.  The clemency discharge did not affect the individual’s underlying discharge, and did not entitle him to any VA benefits.  Rather, it restored federal and, in most instances, state civil rights which may have been denied due to the less than honorable discharge.  If a participant of the program failed to complete the period of alternative service the original undesirable characterization of service, would be retained.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

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 voluntary request for discharge for the good of the service pursuant to the provisions of Presidential Proclamation Number 4313 was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

3.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant failed to complete his required period of alternate service in accordance with the provisions of Presidential Proclamation Number 4313.  Therefore, the applicant was not issued a clemency discharge.

4.  The Board reviewed the applicant's record of service and determined that his quality of service did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an honorable discharge.

5.  The Board noted that the applicant's record of service contains two nonjudical punishments and that he had 1220 days due to AWOL and civil confinement.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to a general discharge.

6.  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.

7.  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

__SP ___  __TAP __  ____WTM   DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.