PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            20 July 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030156

	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	
	Ms. Antoinette Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler 		Chairperson	
	Ms. Ann M. Campbell 		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge (HD).

3.  The applicant states that he was told by his command that after a physical evaluation at Letterman Army Hospital, he would be reinstated to active duty.  During his separation processing, he states he was told that everything was OK by a clerk, but he then received a GD.  He feels that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) first indicated an HD, but then it was changed to a GD.  He therefore contends that his DD Form 214 is incorrect.  He provides no documentation in support of his request. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 June 1960 for 3 years.  He completed his basic training and advanced individual training at Fort Hood, Texas, in military occupational specialty (MOS) 133.00 (Scout Driver).  On 27 August 1960, he was transferred to Germany.  He was then reclassified into MOS 911.10 (Ambulance Driver). 

5.  Upon his return to the Continental United States, he was released from active duty on 15 May 1963 and was transferred to the United States Army Reserve for completion of his service obligation.  He had 2 years, 11 months and 15 days of creditable active service and no lost time.  The highest rank he attained was pay grade E-4.

6.  On 13 April 1964, he reenlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years, in MOS 911, as a Medical Specialist, in pay grade E-3.  He was assigned to the 12th Evacuation Hospital, Fort Ord, California, for duty.  He was advanced again to pay grade 
E-4 on 27 October 1964.

7.  On 15 February 1965, the applicant was hospitalized for suspicion of 
self-inflicted injuries and being intoxicated. 

8.  On 8 March 1965, a Line of Duty Investigation (LODI) was directed by his command at Fort Ord, to determine the circumstances surrounding his injuries and if alcohol (intoxication) was a contributing factor.  The applicant was returned to duty after a period of 8 days of being hospitalized.

9.  On 17 March 1965, the LODI findings were approved.  The investigator found that he caused his own injuries, by slashing his wrists.  Alcohol was involved.  Therefore, the injuries he incurred were not in the line of duty since there was substantial evidence of intentional misconduct and willful negligence. 

10.  On 17 September 1965, he was transferred to Korea.  On 9 November 
1965, the applicant received a neuropsychiatric examination, which diagnosed his condition as Hysterical Character Disorder.  It was recommended that he be administratively separated from the military.  It was also determined that there was no physical or mental defect warranting medical separation.

11.  On 10 November 1965, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, by reason of unsuitability, with a GD.

12.  On 18 November 1965, the applicant accepted a summarized nonjudicial punishment (NJP), under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for missing reveille formation.  His punishment included 14 days of restriction and extra duty.

13.  On or about 29 November 1965, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, did not request a hearing by a board of officers, and did submit a statement in his own behalf.

14.  On 29 November and 2 December 1965, his intermediate and senior intermediate commanders recommended approval of the discharge with a HD.  On 18 December 1965, the separation authority approved his separation with a HD and directed discharge under the provision of Army Regulation 635-209, paragraph 3b, by reason of unsuitability, character and behavior disorder.

15.  On 12 January 1966, he was returned to the United States for separation at the US Army Personnel Center, Oakland, California.  During the discharge processing he was referred for psychiatric evaluation.  The impression of the examining physician was that his mental status showed no evidence of a disorder of thought process or content, that his abstract thinking and judgement were intact and no disease was found.  In addition, he pointed out there was nothing that a psychiatrist could do for him at the present time to help him to gain reinstatement in the Army or a review of his separation action.  He further suggested that the applicant contact a local Judge Advocate General Officer for consultation and assistance.  There is no evidence that the applicant did this.

16.  On 13 January 1965, the applicant was separated with a GD, by the Personnel Center at Oakland, under the provision of Army Regulation 635-209, paragraph 3, by reason of unsuitability, character and behavior disorder.  He had 1 year and 9 months and 1 day of creditable service for the period of service under review, he had no lost time and only the one recorded indiscipline for missing a reveille formation. 

17.  Army Regulation 635-209, in effect at the time set forth the policy and prescribed procedures for eliminating enlisted personnel for unsuitability.  Action was to be taken to discharge an individual for unsuitability when, in the commander's opinion, it was clearly established that: the individual was unlikely to develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and/or become a satisfactory soldier or the individual's psychiatric or physical condition was such as to not warrant discharge for disability.  Unsuitability included inaptitude, character and behavior disorders, disorders of intelligence and transient personality disorders due to acute or special stress, apathy, defective attitude, and inability to expend effort constructively, enuresis, chronic alcoholism, and homosexuality.  Evaluation by a medical officer was required and, when psychiatric indications are involved, the medical officer must be a psychiatrist, if one was available.  A GD or HD was considered appropriate.

18.  There is no record that he ever submitted a request for review of his discharge by the Army Discharge Review Board within that board’s 15-year statute of limitation.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board determined that the applicant is entitled to have his record corrected to show that he was separated on 13 January 1966, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, for unsuitability with a HD, as directed by the separation authority on 18 December 1965.  

2.  Further, the applicant’s characterization is appropriate since he did not have any disciplinary actions taken against him, except for a minor NJP action for failure to report for a reveille formation.  

3.  However, the reason for discharge is fully supported by the facts in the case and there is no basis to change the reason for the discharge.

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

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected:

a.  by showing that the GD the individual concerned received on 
13 January 1966 is void and is without force or effect.

b.  by showing that he received a fully honorable discharge on 13 January 1966 in accordance with paragraph 3a, Army Regulation 635-209, by reason of unsuitability; and

c.  by issuing to the individual concerned an Honorable Discharge
Certificate dated 13 January 1966, in lieu of the General Discharge Certificate of the same date now held by him. 

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

BOARD VOTE: 

__sac__  __amc___  __klw____  GRANT AS STATED INRECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__Samuel A. Crumpler__
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030156	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000720	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19660113	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-209	
DISCHARGE REASON	A40.00	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT,	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DASA	
ISSUES         1.	144.00	
2.	110.00	
3.	A01.13	
4.	A01.56	
5.		
6.