PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            18 August 1999    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999023047

	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	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edward Williamson		Member	
	Ms. Sherri V. Ward		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.

3.  He states that he was not aware that he had “been given a bad discharge for [his] last period of service” until he sought assistance from the VA.  He notes that he was diagnosed with a schizoid personality just prior to his separation and maintains that his overall service should have warranted an honorable discharge. In support of his request he submits extracts from his service medical records.

4.  Records available to the Board indicate the applicant initially entered active duty for a period of three years on 26 August 1971.  He was honorably discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment on 18 June 1974 and again on 25 June 1976.

5.  During his first four years of military service the applicant served honorably, was promoted to pay grade E-5 and awarded an Army Good Conduct Medal.  In November 1976, after serving nearly seven months as the section chief at the 40th AG Postal Detachment in Germany, the applicant apparently stole $8,000.00 from postal funds and departed AWOL.

6.  He was apprehended and returned to military control in July 1977.  In August 1977, while in confinement awaiting court-martial charges, the applicant was admitted to Walson Army Hospital at Fort Dix, New Jersey with a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia.  

7.  He was transferred to Eisenhower Army Medical Center at Fort Gordon, Georgia on 28 August 1977.  Medical documents note the applicant had two prior periods of hospitalization for psychiatric reasons prior to his entry on active duty, once at the age of 9 and again at age 15.  The evaluating physician noted the applicant began to have “serious difficulties when he became the senior NCO and had to take on administrative and supervisory duties” after his assignment to Germany.  It was concluded the applicant suffered from a chronic, severe schizoid personality which existed prior to his entry on active duty.  He was returned to duty at Fort Dix on 17 November 1977 to face court-martial charges.

8.  Although documents associated with the applicant’s administrative separation action are no longer part of his file a single document, dated 1 December 1977, indicates the applicant’s unit commander recommended approval of the applicant’s request to be discharged under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10 in lieu of trail by court-martial.  The recommendation notes the applicant had been medically examined and was found qualified for separation. He also noted that there “does not appear to be any reasonable grounds to believe that the individual is or was at the time of his misconduct mentally defective, deranged, or abnormal.”

9.  On 30 December 1977 the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions.

10.  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.

11.  Army Regulation 635-40, which establishes the policies and provisions for the separation of soldiers by reason of physical disability states, that a soldier who is charged with an offense under the UCMJ or who is under investigation for an offense chargeable under the UCMJ which could result in dismissal or punitive discharge, may not be referred for, or continue, disability processing unless the office exercising proper court-martial jurisdiction dismisses the charges.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at that time.  The applicant’s separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The overall quality of the applicant’s last period of service does not warrant recharacterization of his discharge and the nature of his offenses preclude separation by reason of disability.  However, in view of the honorable nature of his prior enlistment, his honorable discharge on 25 January 1976 should be considered a complete and unconditional separation.  To do otherwise would work an injustice upon him by depriving him, or his heirs, of consideration for certain VA benefits for his honorable period of service.

3.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions and in recognition of his previous years of good service, it would be appropriate and proper to consider his honorable discharge on 25 January 1976 as a complete and unconditional separation from the military service.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was eligible for a complete and unconditional separation from the military service at the time of his honorable discharge on 25 January 1976.
2.  That so much of the application as in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

____rvo_  __ew____  __svw___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999023047	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990818	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 110.00		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.