PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:            31 May 2000       
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999034728

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James E. Vick		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelly		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was issued a clemency discharge and he thought his discharge was honorable as a result of the Presidential Proclamation.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge), a copy of a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) and an award certificate for the Army Commendation Medal. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted on 27 December 1967 for a period of 3 years.  He served as a tactical circuit controller in Vietnam from 28 August 1968 through 28 August 1969.

5.  On 10 November 1969 nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  

6.  The applicant went AWOL on 2 December 1969 and voluntarily returned to military control on 3 August 1970.  Charges were preferred against the applicant for the AWOL period with a recommendation for trial by special court-martial.   

7.  On 10 August 1970 the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He acknowledged that he understood he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an undesirable discharge, that he personally made the choice to submit this request and did not elect to submit a statement on his own behalf.
  
8.  On 27 August 1970 the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

9.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 27 August 1970 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service.  He had served 2 years, 1 month and 26 days of total active service and had 184 days of lost time due to AWOL.  He was separated on temporary records.

10.  On 25 November 1975, the applicant was notified that he was awarded a clemency discharge, pursuant to Presidential Proclamation 4313 of 
16 September 1974.  He was also advised that he could apply to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for review and possible change of his discharge.   

11.  There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant applied to the ADRB within its 15-year statute of limitations.
12.  Headquarters, 1st Signal Brigade (USASTRATCOM) General Orders Number 2295, dated 15 September 1969, shows the applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service from 29 August 1968 to
30 August 1969.  This award is not shown on his DD Form 214. 

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that 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 the 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.  

14.  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.  Upon successful completion of the specified alternative service, the former members would be granted a clemency discharge by the President of the United States, thus restoring his or her affected civil rights.  The clemency discharge did not affect the underlying discharge and did not entitle the individual to any benefits administered by the Veterans Administration.  Soldiers who were AWOL entered the program by returning to military control and accepting a discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

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

3.  The applicant’s contention that he thought his discharge was honorable as a result of the Presidential Proclamation is not supported by the evidence of record.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant was notified by letter on
25 November 1975 that he was awarded a clemency discharge, pursuant to Presidential Proclamation 4313 of 16 September 1974.  The letter also indicated that he could apply to the ADRB for review and possible change of his discharge.

4.  The applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal; therefore, he is entitled to correction of his military records to show this award. 

5.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records, but only 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 awarded the Army Commendation Medal.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

JEV_____  SK_____  JPI_____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		James E. Vick_________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999034728	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000531	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19700827	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 Chapter 10  	
DISCHARGE REASON	For the good of the service	
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0200	
2.	107.0020	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.