PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:

	BOARD DATE:            23 September 1998                 
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AC97-11080

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Thomas D. Howard Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Member	
	Mr. George D.Paxson		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, in effect, that his general/under honorable conditions discharge (GD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that his medical condition was the cause of his behavior and he saw a psychologist at the time of his discharge and is currently being treated for psychological problems.  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 17 January 1970 he entered the Regular Army for a period of 4 years at the age of 19.  At the time of his enlistment in the Regular Army, he had already served honorably for 8 months and 1 day as an inductee in the Army of the United States.  He also had successfully completed basic training at Fort Bragg, North Carolina; advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort McClellan, Alabama; he held military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman); and he had attained the rank of 
specialist/E-4.

5.  On 27 October 1971 the applicant’s unit commander, based on a recommendation of medical personnel, initiated separation action on the applicant, under the provisions of AR 635-212 for unsuitability.  The unit commander recommended that the applicant be given a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD), and cited the recommendation of medical personnel, who indicated the applicant had a condition which represented a basic character and behavior disorder, as the basis for his action.  They further commented that the condition was not amenable to hospitalization, treatment in a military setting, disciplinary action, training, or reclassification to another type of duty.

9.  The applicant acknowledged that he had been notified by his commanding officer that his discharge was being recommended and completed his election of rights.  On this document the applicant waived his right to the following:  military counsel; a hearing before a board of officers; and he elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

10.  The appropriate authority, in an undated endorsement, approved the applicant’s discharge for unsuitability, under the provisions of AR 635-212
(SPN 264-Character and Behavior Disorder), and directed he be issued a GD. Accordingly, on 29 November 1971 the applicant was discharged after completing 10 months and 7 days of his current enlistment, a total of 1 year.
6 months, and 8 days of active military service, and accruing 5 days of time lost due to AWOL.

11.  Department of the Army message # 302221Z, March 1976 changed “character and behavior disorder” to “personality disorder”.

12.  AR 635-200, currently in effect, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 provides, in pertinent part, when separation is because of a personality disorder, the service of a soldier separated per this paragraph will be characterized as honorable unless an entry level separation is required under chapter 3, section III.  Characterization of service under honorable conditions may be awarded to a soldier who has been convicted of an offense by general court-martial or who has been convicted by more than one special court-martial in the current enlistment, period of obligated service, or any extension thereof.

13.  Department of Defense (DOD) Directive 1332.28, dated 11 August 1982, subject: Discharge Review Board Procedures and Standards, establishes uniform policies, procedures, and standards for the review of discharges or dismissals under Title 10, United States Code, section 1553, and applies to the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Military Departments.  Section 4 of that Directive sets forth the objectives for discharge review.  It provides that a discharge shall be deemed proper unless it is determined that a change in policy by the military service of which the applicant was a member, made expressly retroactive to the type of discharge under consideration, requires a change in the discharge.  Furthermore, a discharge shall be deemed to be equitable unless there is substantial doubt the applicant would have received the same discharge if relevant current policies and procedures had been available to the applicant at the time the discharge was considered, even though the discharge was determined to have been otherwise equitable and proper at the time of issuance.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s record of service does not meet the criteria for an under honorable conditions discharge by current Army regulations.

2.  Had the ADRB reviewed the applicant’s discharge under DOD Directive 1332.28, it is reasonable to presume that his discharge would have been upgraded based on the application of the current regulation for discharges because of a personality disorder.

3.  Although DOD Directive 1332.28 provides policy for review of discharges for Discharge Review Boards, it appears appropriate that this Board adopt and apply the standards set forth in this Directive for this particular case.

4.  Accordingly, in view of the current standards for discharges issued because of a personality disorder, a discharge under honorable conditions was unduly harsh and unjust.  It would now be appropriate to correct the inequity and issue the applicant an Honorable Discharge.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was separated from the service with an Honorable Discharge Certificate on 29 November 1971.

2.  That the Department of the Army issue to the individual concerned an Honorable Discharge Certificate from the Regular Army, dated 29 November 1971, in lieu of the discharge under honorable conditions of the same date now held by him.

BOARD VOTE:  

________  ________  ________  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON