SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  5 February 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070017027 


	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.  A quorum was present during the further consideration and deliberation.  The findings appearing in proceedings dated
12 October 2006 were affirmed.  The following additional findings, conclusions, and recommendations were adopted by the Board.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Ms. Joyce A. Wright

Analyst

	The Board convened at the call of the Director on the above date to reconsider the conclusions and recommendation appearing in proceedings dated   5 February 2008.


Mr. Kenneth L. Wright 

Chairperson

Mr. Antonio Uribe

Member

Mr. Ronald Gant

Member

	The Board considered the following additional evidence:

	Exhibit C – (show the identifying data for the original Record of Proceedings)












CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE:

20.  On 5 November 2007 information was received from the applicant in regard to the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20060004613, dated 12 October 2006. 

21.  The evidence submitted consists of the previous proceedings and a copy of his ADRB (Army Discharge Review Board) proceedings. 

ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

11.  At the time of the decision of the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20060004613, dated 12 October 2006, it was the intent of the ABCMR to make the applicant’s record as administratively correct as it should properly have been at the time.

12.  The Record of Proceedings for the decision made by the Board in Docket Number AR20060004613, contained three factual errors and one error of omission.

	a.  The Record of Proceedings erroneously stated in paragraph 1 of the section titled, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  "1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his general discharge, under honorable conditions, be upgraded to honorable."

	b.  The Record of Proceedings incompletely stated in paragraph 16 of the section titled, CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:  "16.  The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 20 November 1991.  The ADRB determined that his discharge was proper but was inequitable as to the characterization.  The ADRB voted 4-1 to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions, but voted not to change the narrative reason for discharge on 24 March 1994."

c.  The Record of Proceedings erroneously stated in paragraph 4 of the section titled, DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS:  "4.  The evidence shows that the applicant applied to the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge and it was upgraded to general, under honorable conditions, on 24 March 1994.  However, he is now requesting that his GD be upgraded to honorable.



	d.  Based on the errors described above, the following paragraph was erroneously omitted from the Record of Proceedings:  "Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, 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 separation specifically allows such characterization."

13.  The Record of Proceedings correctly should have stated in paragraph 1 of the section titled, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  "1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable."

14.  The Record of Proceedings correctly should have continued with the following verbiage, after the existing verbiage in paragraph 16, of the section titled, CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:  ["The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge on 20 November 1991.  The ADRB determined that his discharge was proper but was inequitable as to the characterization.  The ADRB voted 4-1 to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions, but voted not to change the narrative reason for discharge on 24 March 1994."]  Following the ADRB vote, the ADRB Case Summary was sent to the Secretarial Review Authority as a matter of interest.  The Secretarial Review Authority rejected upgrade of the applicant's discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable, because he did not find the applicant's good post service conduct warranted an upgrade.  Neither the characterization of service nor the reason for discharge were changed.

15.  The Record of Proceedings erroneously stated in paragraph 4 of the section titled, DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS:  "4.  The evidence shows that the applicant applied to the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge and it was upgraded to general, under honorable conditions, on 24 March 1994.  However, he is now requesting that his GD be upgraded to honorable."  The paragraph should correctly have stated, "The evidence shows that the applicant applied to the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge characterized as under other than honorable conditions and his application was denied.  The applicant has
submitted his appeal to the ABCMR and has requested that his discharge characterized as under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable."


16.  Had the factual errors contained in the Record of Proceedings not been reported as they were, erroneously implying that an upgrade had been granted the applicant by the ADRB to a general, under honorable, discharge from one characterized as under other than honorable conditions, the following glossary paragraph would have been properly included in the Record of Proceedings:  "Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, 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 separation specifically allows such characterization."

17.  The evidence shows on 24 March 1994, the applicant was notified after having reviewed his case, the ADRB had decided to deny his appeal for an upgrade of his discharge.

18.  The applicant's current application for the issuance of a DD Form 215 to reflect the upgrade he believes he received based on the erroneous contents of the Record of Proceedings for Board Docket Number AR20060004613 which was submitted on a DD Form 293, Application for Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States, should correctly have been submitted on a DD Form 149, Application for the Correction of Military Record.

19.  Based on the 24 March 1994 ADRB decision and the follow-on review by the Secretarial Review Authority, the applicant was not entitled to a correction of his originally – issued DD Form 214 nor to a reconstructed DD Form 214 to show an upgrade to his discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

__KLW__  __AU____  __RG___  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION





BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant amendment of the Record of Proceedings prepared for ABCMR Docket Number AR20060004613, dated 12 October 2006, to correct information that was erroneously reported and contained in this Record of Proceedings to:

	a. correctly show in THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: section of the Record of Proceedings:  "1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable."

	b.  add the following verbiage to the Record of Proceeding after the existing verbiage in paragraph 16, of the section titled, CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:  "Following the ADRB vote, the ADRB Case Summary was sent to the Secretarial Review Authority as a matter of interest.  The Secretarial Review Authority rejected upgrade of the applicant's discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable, because he did not find the applicant's good post service conduct warranted an upgrade.  Neither the characterization of service nor the reason for discharge was changed."

	c.  change the verbiage in the existing paragraph 4, of the DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Section, to read:  The evidence shows that the applicant applied to the ADRB for an upgrade of his discharge characterized as under other than honorable conditions and his application was denied.  The applicant has submitted his appeal to the ABCMR and has requested that his discharge characterized as under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable; 

d.  add the following paragraph to the section titled, CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: of the Record of Proceedings for Docket Number AR 20060004613:  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant amendment of the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records set forth in Docket Number AR20060004613, dated 12 October 2006, to show in the respective section of the Record of Proceedings:  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, 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 separation specifically allows such characterization; and


e.  to provide an appropriate notice to the applicant that he is not entitled to a correction to his originally - issued DD Form 214 nor is he entitled to a reconstructed DD Form 214 to show an upgrade to the characterization of his discharge. 




______Kenneth L. Wright   _
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070017027
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20080205
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19910807
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200, chap 10. . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
100
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.