RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          11 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050001451


      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. John Slone                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Deborah Jacobs                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Michael Flynn                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable
conditions be upgraded.  He also requests that the second digit of his
Social Security Number (SSN) on his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or
Discharge) for the period ending 10 February 1977 be corrected to show “8”
instead of “0.”

2.  The applicant states he was experiencing severe marital problems at the
time of his discharge, he had young children at home, and his release from
the service seemed to be the only cure.  He points out that he had four
plus years in the service and no disciplinary actions, he served as a
recruiter, and he had attained the rank of specialist four.  He also
states, in effect, the Chapter 10 discharge is unfair and his company
commander advised him that his discharge could/would be upgraded.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 for the period ending
10 February 1977.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 10 February 1977.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 23 August 1994; however, this application was received on 31 January
2005.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  Item 1 (Service No. [Number]/SSAN [Social Security Account Number]) on
the applicant’s DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract), dated 15 August 1972,
shows the second digit of the applicant’s SSN is “8.”  His enlistment
contract also shows that he enlisted on 15 August 1972 in the U.S. Army
Reserve for a period of 6 years.  He was ordered to active duty on 29
December 1971 for training and was released from active duty on 6 June
1973.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 62B (engineer
equipment repairman).

4.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period ending 6 June 1973 shows the
second digit of his SSN is “8.”

5.  The applicant was ordered to active duty on 23 September 1976 for a
period of 17 months and 27 days.  He attained the rank of private two on 23
September 1976.

6.  The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on 5 November 1976 and
was apprehended by military authorities on 11 January 1977.  Charges were
preferred against the applicant for the AWOL period; however, the charge
sheet is not available.

7.  On 18 January 1977, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and
requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
chapter 10, for the good of the service.  He indicated in his request that
he understood he might be discharged under other than honorable conditions
and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate; that he might be
deprived of many or all Army benefits; that he might be ineligible for many
or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration; and that he
might be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both
Federal and State law.  He also acknowledged that he might expect to
encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an undesirable
discharge.  He elected to submit a statement on his behalf.  In summary, he
stated when he missed a drill because of his job, his new commanding
officer warned him of activation and subsequently he was activated for 17
months.  He stated that he reported to duty; however, he tried everything
to get out of the Army, to no avail.  During this time his wife had a lot
of problems at home with his oldest son and he decided to go AWOL.

8.  On 26 January 1977, the separation authority approved the applicant's
request for discharge and directed that he be furnished a discharge under
other than honorable conditions.

9.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable
conditions on 10 February 1977 under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service.  He had served 8 months
and 1 day of total active service with 67 days of lost time due to AWOL.

10.  Item 3 (Social Security Number) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the
period ending 10 February 1977 shows the second digit is “0.”

11.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge
Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of
limitations.

12.  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,
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, a discharge under
other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

13.  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.

14.  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.

15.  The U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to
automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits
when an applicant requests a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted
if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason
for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Marital problems are not grounds for upgrading a discharge.  There is
no evidence the applicant sought assistance from his chain of command or
chaplain on a way to resolve his problems within established Army
procedures.

2.  A discharge upgrade is not automatic.

3.  The applicant’s record of service included 67 days of AWOL and did not
meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army
personnel.  His record of service was also not satisfactory.  Therefore,
the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant
an honorable discharge or a general discharge.
4.  The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions
of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial,
was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable
regulations.

5.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were
appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

6.  The preponderance of evidence of record shows the second digit of the
applicant’s SSN shown in item 3 on his DD Form 214 for the period ending
10 February 1977 is incorrect.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to
correct the second digit of his SSN to show “8” instead of “0” in item 3 on
his DD Form 214 for the period ending 10 February 1977.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF

JS_____  DJ______  MF______  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely
file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army
records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending item 3 on his
DD Form 214 for the period ending 10 February 1977 to show the second digit
of his SSN is “8.”

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
a discharge upgrade to honorable or general.




            ____John Slone________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050001451                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050811                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UOTHC                                   |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19770210                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200 Chapter 10                   |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |For the good of the service             |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |144.0000                                |
|2.                      |100.0900                                |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]