PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       . 

	BOARD DATE:            31 JULY 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003087941

	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	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert L. Duecaster 		Member	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire 		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), and that his separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected to add the Purple Heart (PH) to the list of authorized awards. 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that his immaturity and inability to live with those who were different from the people he lived with on the reservation impaired his ability to serve.  He states that he served in combat in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) and was wounded in action.  He further states that in looking back he only wishes that he could have had a commander that looked out for him in a manner that would have allowed him to understand the ramifications of his misconduct.  He states that there was some discrimination toward him based on his American Indian status and that he also suffered from a feeling of not belonging based on his background.  As a result of these feelings, he turned to alcohol and this led to several stints of his being absent without leave (AWOL).  

4.  The applicant claims that since leaving the Army, he has worked diligently to improve his life by being alcohol free and working in the community to help individuals improve their life.  He now requests that his discharge be upgraded based on his positive contribution to society subsequent to his term of enlistment. In support of his application, he submits three letters of support, a copy of his DD Form 214, and a copy of the orders awarding him the PH.  

5.  The applicant’s military records show that he entered the Army for a period of 2 years on 28 June 1966.  He was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11H (Infantry Direct Fire Crewman).  He continuously served on active duty for 2 years and 12 days, until being released from active duty (REFRAD) with a GD on 30 August 1968, by reason of expiration of term of service (ETS).

6.  The applicant’s record does contain an extensive history of AWOL related misconduct that included his accruing 322 days of time lost due to AWOL.  These offenses resulted in his conviction by special court-martial on three separate occasions for AWOL. 

7.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant upon his REFRAD shows that he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of ETS.  It also shows he had earned the following awards:  National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal with 2 bronze service stars; Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 Device; and Combat Infantryman Badge.  

8.  The applicant Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains a correction to the applicant’s separation document (DD Form 215), dated 3 September 1986, which added the PH to the list of authorized awards contained in
Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaigns Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant 30 August 1969 
DD Form 214.  

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

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 in effect at the time of the applicant’s separation provided the discretionary authority to issue a GD in connection with separation by reason of ETS.  Chapter 4 of Army Regulation 635-200 currently in effect states, in pertinent part, that a soldier being separated upon expiration of enlistment or fulfillment of service obligation will be awarded a character of service of honorable.  A GD is not an option under current standards.  

11.  Department of Defense (DOD) Directive 1332.28 established uniform policies, procedures, and standards for the review of discharges.  It states, in effect, that a discharge will be considered inequitable if there is substantial doubt the applicant would have received the same discharge under current policies and procedures. 

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board finds the applicant’s discharge was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time.  However, it concludes that it is inequitable under current regulatory standards.  

2.  Regulations currently in effect mandate the award of an HD to soldiers separating at ETS, and do not allow for the issue of a GD.  Further, DOD policy for discharge review by Discharge Review Boards stipulates that discharges will be considered to be inequitable if there is a substantial doubt that the member would receive the same discharge under current policies and procedures.  

3.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was separated at ETS and issued a GD after completing 2 years and 12 days of active military service.  The record also confirms that the applicant completed a combat tour in the RVN and received both the PH and CIB.  The Board also notes the applicant’s outstanding post service conduct, as evidenced in the supporting statements.  Thus, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate to apply current standards and upgrade the applicant’s discharge at this time.  

4.  The applicant is advised that the enclosed DD Form 215, dated 3 September 1986, added his earned PH to Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaigns Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his 30 August 1969 DD Form 214, and no further Board action is necessary on this issue.   

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

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned received an honorable discharge on 
30 August 1969, in lieu of the general discharge of the same date he now holds; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects this change. 

BOARD VOTE:  

__RLD___  __KH___  __GJW__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Gail J. Wire
		     CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087941	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED		
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1969/08/30	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	ETS	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT 	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 954	144.0200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.