ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  13 June 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20190001788


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, the issuance of a Clemency Discharge Certificate.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

*	DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions 
of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), with Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) 
letter dated 22 February 2019 and a self-authored letter dated 14 March 2019
*	U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Letter, dated 24 November 1975
*	U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Human Resources Specialist 
Statement (undated)
*	Alternative Service Employer Network Statement (undated)
*	State of Connecticut DOT Personnel Record (undated)
*	Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of 
Claim), dated 3 August 2018

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. 
Code (USC), Section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military 
Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in 
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.

2.  The applicant states: 

   a.  His alternative service was completed years ago and his pardon and clemency 
were never received from President Ford.  He has been trying to receive his neutral 
discharge for years.  After receiving his conditions pardon from President Ford, he was 
able, with the help of the Selective Service, to find employment with the State of 
Connecticut working highway maintenance.  He remembers it took a while to find 
qualifying alternative service that would support his family and at the same time fulfill his 
six month service requirement.  Once he completed his service, he moved on.

	b.  He assumed that if he ever needed a copy of his employment or verification it 
would be supplied to him.  He has moved many times and he has had many jobs, 
believing that maybe it was his fault for not receiving his Clemency Discharge 
Certificate.  However, he also knows how long things take to get resolved with the 
government.  The short of it is, he did his part and he fulfilled his alternative service.  He 
should be sent a "neutral discharge."

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 March 1972.  

4.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 9 August 1972, under the 
provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent 
without leave (AWOL) from on or about 1 August until on or about 7 August 1972.

5.  The applicant accepted NJP on 29 November 1972, under the provisions of 
Article 15 of the UCMJ, for failure to obey a lawful order on or about 20 November and 
21 November 1972.

6.  The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge are not available 
for review.  However, his DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 17 January 1973, 
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted 
Personnel), Chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He 
completed 8 months and 4 days of total active service and he had approximately 
44 days of lost time due to being in an AWOL status.  He was issued an Undesirable 
Discharge Certificate and his service was characterized as under other than honorable 
conditions.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200, in affect at that time, set forth the policies, standards, and 
procedures to insure the readiness and competency of the force while providing for the 
orderly administrative separation of enlisted members for a variety of reasons.  The 
issuance of a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, 
required the applicant to have requested from the Army – voluntarily, willingly, and in 
writing – discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  It is presumed that all requirements of 
law and regulation were met and the applicant's rights were fully protected throughout 
the separation process.    

8.  In a DOJ letter dated 24 November 1975, the applicant was notified that President 
Ford had granted him conditional clemency for his absence offense.  The letter states:

	a.  He was required to perform six months of alternative service before receiving a 
full pardon and clemency discharge and he would receive his pardon and clemency 
discharge when he completed his alternative service.

	b.  The pardon would be given for the AWOL offense(s) he committed between 
4 August 1964 and 28 March 1973, which formed the basis for his discharge.  The 
clemency discharge would replace his undesirable discharge and should be considered 
a neutral discharge, neither honorable nor less than honorable.

	c.  He had 30 days from the date of the letter to request a reduction in the length of 
his alternative service.  If he believed his case should be reconsidered, he needed to 
explain why before that time expired.

	d.  He could request reconsideration of his case if he had new evidence he believed 
would be helpful, or if he had new reasons to present for reducing the period of 
alternative service.  His case would not be reconsidered if he merely disagreed with the 
decision or if he restated what he had already said.

	e.  Attached to the letter was a form that showed what mitigating and aggravating 
factors were identified in his case and how the amount of alternative service was 
determined.  The form did not show the weight given to each factor.

9.  The applicant provides an Alternative Service Employer Network Statement that 
identifies eligible employers and appropriate employment for completion of alternative 
service.

10.  The applicant provides a letter from the State of Connecticut DOT Human 
Resources Specialist, confirming that he was employed with the DOT as a DOT 
Maintainer 2, during the period 2 April 1979 thru 8 February 1980.

11.  A review of the available record fails to reveal a Certificate of Completion from the 
Selective Service System for alternative service or a DD Form 1953A (Clemency 
Discharge Certificate).

12.  The Board should consider the provided evidence and the applicant's statement in 
accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After review of the application and all evidence, the Board found sufficient evidence to 
grant relief.  The Board determined that the applicant is entitled to receive a clemency 
discharge certificate in that he completed the required alternate service and received 
notification that President Ford had granted him conditional clemency for his absence 
offense.  The Board further found that the applicant’s discharge characterization of 
Under Other than Honorable Conditions stands and is not affected by the award of the 
clemency discharge certificate.  The Board also discussed that the Department of 
Defense no longer produces DD Form 1953a (Clemency Discharge Certificates) but in 
cases similar to the applicant’s, in which the applicant has never received such a 
certificate, the Army Review Boards Agency issues a commensurate certificate.


BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:XXX	:XXX	:XXX	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a 
recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of 
the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by issuing the applicant an 
ARBA certificate showing the applicant received a clemency discharge.


	  
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.

ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S):  Not Applicable

REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, USC, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military 
records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  
This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely 
file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in 
the interest of justice to do so.

2.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted 
personnel.

   a.  Paragraph 3-7a states 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 or is otherwise so 
meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.
   
   b.  Paragraph 3-7b states 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.

   c.  Chapter 10 states that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for 
which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for 
discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be 
submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s 
admission of guilt.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an 
undesirable discharge was normally furnished to an individual who was discharged for the 
good of the service.

3.  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.  Soldiers who were AWOL entered the program 
by returning to military control and accepting a discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 

	a.  Under this proclamation, eligible Soldiers 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 former Soldier was issued a Certificate of Completion from the Selective Service 
System and a DD Form 1953A (Clemency Discharge Certificate).  

	b.  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 that 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.  
 
4.  The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to 
Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records 
on 25 July 2018, regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations.  Clemency 
generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence.  Boards for 
Correction of Military/Naval Records may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial 
forum.  However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a 
court-martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in a discharge, 
which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds.  

	a.  This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and 
principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority.  In 
determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency 
grounds, Boards shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn 
testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health 
conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was 
committed, and uniformity of punishment.  

	b.  Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of 
service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not 
result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses 
or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for 
the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization.

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20190001788

6

1