PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           21 December 1999        
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030411

	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. McKim-Spilker		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Meta Waller		Member	
	Ms. Debra Williams		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 be upgraded to honorable.

3.  He states, in effect, that his discharge was based on a diagnosed personality disorder and that his service should be characterized as honorable since there was no misconduct during his period of service. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted into the U.S. Army on 12 June 1962 for a period of 2 years.  He completed basic combat training at Fort Ord, California, and was assigned to the Presidio of San Francisco for advanced individual training (AIT).  

5.  The evidence of record shows that the highest rank attained by the applicant was private/E-2.  There is no misconduct of record. 

6.  On 9 November 1962 the applicant was seen for evaluation for feelings of progressive anxiety, confusion, and numerous physical symptoms, such as vague shifting headaches and chronic nausea and vomiting.  The psychiatrist opined that the applicant was frightened of his extreme anger and aggression towards his fellow soldiers who he felt were abusing him and making fun of him.

7.  On 16 November 1962 the applicant underwent psychiatric testing.  These tests confirmed an inadequate and unstable personality.  The psychiatrist noted that the applicant’s hold on reality was quite tenuous and borderline.   Further, he opined that the applicant was in the process of decompensating in his capacity to tolerate the emotional stresses of military life.  He diagnosed a severe inadequate personality disorder and recommended separation from the service under the provisions of AR 635-209 for reasons of psychological unadaptibility to military service. 

8.  On 7 January 1963 the unit commander recommended the applicant for discharged under the provisions of AR 635-209 for unsuitability and psychological unadaptability to military service.  

9.  On 14 January 1963 the discharge was approved under the provisions of AR 635-209 by reason of unsuitability – character and behavior disorders.  The applicant was discharged on 18 January 1963 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 

10.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15 year statute of limitations. 

11.  Department of the Army message #302221Z March 1976, changed “character and behavior disorder” to “personality disorder.”
12.  Army Regulation 635-200, currently in effect, sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 provides, in 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. 

13.  Department of Defense (DOD) Directive 1332.28, 11 August 1982, 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 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.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s record of service does not meet the criteria for a general, under honorable conditions discharge under 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 personality disorder. 

3.  Although DOD Directive 1332.28 provides policy for review of discharges for Discharge Review Boards, it appears that this Board should adopt the standards set forth in that 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 upgrade the applicant’s characterization of service to honorable.

5.  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 to show that the individual concerned was separated from the service with an Honorable Discharge Certificate on 18 January 1963.  

2.  That the Department of the Army issue to the individual concerned an Honorable Discharge Certificate from the Army of the United States, dated 18 January 1963, in lieu of the discharge under honorable conditions of the same date now held by him.

BOARD VOTE:  

__hof____  __mw___  __dw____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030411	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991103	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19630118	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-209  	
DISCHARGE REASON	8600	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 9442		
2. 9406		
3. 		
4.		
5.		
6.