PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            24 February 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999029102 

	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.  

	Ms. Antoinette Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adlophi		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Huber		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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 under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

3.  That his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident.  He previously served in the US Army Reserve (USAR) and the Regular Army (RA).  He feels he was a good solider with no other adverse actions and should not be punished any longer for the past.  He further states that he would like to live the rest of his life with a clean record because he loves his country and is sorry this occurred.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he served honorably in the USAR from 30 January 1975 to 21 January 1976, during which time he completed 
3 months and 28 days active service for completion of his required period of Initial Active Duty for Training (IADT).  He was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76Y (Supply Specialist).  His records are unclear as to when he was initially discharged from the USAR, but on 20 August 1976, he again enlisted in the USAR (this time the Delayed Entry Program (DEP).

5.  On 21 October 1976, he was discharged from the DEP and on 22 October 1976, he enlisted in the RA directly from his USAR status for 4 years, in pay grade E-2.  In consonance with his enlistment contract, he was retrained
in MOS 63F (Recovery Specialist).  On 27 January 1977, he was assigned 
to Germany.  He served in Germany as a supply specialist (MOS 76Y), 
as an armorer (MOS 76Y), and as a recovery specialist (MOS 63F).  He was advanced to pay grade E-4 on 24 September 1978.  

6.  On 4 June 1979, he returned from Germany and was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas, where he was utilized as a supply specialist and a recovery specialist.  However, on 29 October 1979, as the result of an earlier medical examination, he was given a 3-Profile due to motion sickness and color blindness.  His medical profile precluded riding in vehicles without good ventilation and any duties requiring good color discrimination.  On the same date, he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal for his first 3 years of service. Later in 1979, he underwent MOS reclassification action, but a final decision appears to have been delayed. 

7.  On 22 April 1980 he was honorably discharged in order to reenlist.  He was credited with 3 years, 6 months and 1 day of active service for this period of service.  Further, he had no record of indisciplines or lost time during this period of enlistment.  

8.  On 23 April 1980, he reenlisted for 3 years, in pay grade E-4 and retraining in MOS 72E (Telecommunication Center Operator).  In August 1980, he was reclassified by authorities at Fort Hood into MOS 63T (Bradley Fighting Vehicle System Mechanic), but he never appears to have performed duties in this MOS.  He reported for his MOS 72E retraining in November 1980 at Fort Gordon, Georgia.  He successfully completed the 11-week course in March 1981.

9.  On 12 March 1981, he was reclassified into MOS 72E and on 13 March he departed Fort Gordon for assignment to Fort Bragg, North Carolina.  Whether he ever reported is unclear.

10.  On 19 April 1981, he was admitted to the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, DC.  His diagnosis was a borderline personality disorder after supposedly a second suicide attempt.  The first incident appears to have been earlier and he claimed treatment by the Veterans Administration in West Virginia. The symptoms he was experiencing include: persistent anger, impulsitivity, social isolation, chronic emptiness and inability to cope with military and marital difficulties.  The plan was to release him to duty for administrative separation action.  He was released from the medical ward on 27 April 1981, but apparently was held at the Medical Holding Detachment at Walter Reed.  

11.  On 22 June 1981, while still at Walter Reed, he departed absent without leave (AWOL).  He was apprehended by civil authorities 23 October 1981 in Orlando, Florida.  While in Orlando, he was examined at the Naval Regional Medical Center, Orlando apparently as the result of a “suicide gesture” while in civil confinement.  He was examined by a medical officer and was “…found to have no physical or medical problems.“  The comment was made that: “PT is not suicidal.  All he wants to do is get out of the service.”  He was transferred first to Fort Stewart, Georgia, then to Fort Bragg to await administrative processing. 

12.  Discharge proceedings are not now a matter of record.  However, 
on 1 October 1984, in connection with his appeal to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), when the proceedings were apparently available, it was shown that on 3 November 1981, court-martial charges were preferred for the period of AWOL from 22 June to 23 October 1981.  On 5 November 1981, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, Army Regulation AR 635-200, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court martial.  He did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  On 16 November 1981, he was cleared for separation by a mental status evaluation, and was placed on excess leave.

13.  His chain of command recommended approval of his discharge.  On
4 December 1981, the separation authority approved his separation with a UOTHC discharge.

14.  On 18 December 1981, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial with a UOTHC.  He had completed: 1 year, 7 months and
3 days on the enlistment under review, had 123 days of lost time and 43 days of excess leave.  His pay grade at the time of separation was pay grade E-1.

15.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant on 18 December 1981, shows no prior inactive service in item 12e (Total Prior Inactive Service) of the form, although in item 12d (Prior Active Service) he is credited with the 3 months and 28 days prior active service he served for his IADT period while in the USAR.  

16.  On 21 September 1984, the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a upgrade of his discharge.  On 1 October 1984, that board denied his requested. 

17.  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.  Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

18.  The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), in determining qualifications for benefits administered by that agency generally holds that an individual who accepts a discharge prior to completion of her complete term of obligated service may not be eligible for benefits unless or until the DVA or the Service Department determines that the early discharge amounted to a complete and unconditional separation from the service. 

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s record is void of facts and circumstances concerning events that led to his discharge from the Army.  The Board noted that the applicant’s record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes regularity in the discharge process.  Therefore, the Board concludes that his UOTHC discharge issued on 18 December 1981, for the good of the service, was administratively correct and in conformance with the applicable regulations then in effect.  Further, he received a mental status evaluation during the discharge process, which found no evidence of mental disorders.  

2.  Additionally, the Board concludes that the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  However, it appears that he should have been considered as having been issued a complete and unconditional separation for the honorable period of service from 22 October 1976 through 22 April 1980.  This period of service was fully satisfactory.  He had no indisciplines, lost time and served in excess 
of 3 1/2 years of that enlistment.  He also achieved pay grade E-4 during his first enlistment.

4.  The circumstances of the applicant’s honorable discharge on 22 April 1980 have worked an injustice upon him by depriving him of consideration for certain VA benefits for the preceding period of service.

5.  Additionally, the Board notes that he had USAR service sometime between 
30 January 1975 and 21 October 1976, but the exact amount of service cannot be determined except for the 3 months and 28 days active service for his IADT period. In the absence of the appropriate service computation for his inactive service in the USAR, the Board declines to direct further correction of his DD Form 2l4 issued on 18 December 1981 concerning entries in item 12e.  

6.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected, but only as recommended below.

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 at the time of his honorable discharge on 22 April 1980.  

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

___CLA   _JPH_  __MVT_  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

_______  _______  _____  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___          _             _   _          DENY APPLICATION

		__CELIA L ADOLPHI___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR199929102	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000224	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19811218	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, CH 10 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Director	
ISSUES         1.	A01.00	
2.	A10.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.