PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  .

	BOARD DATE:   28 July 1999                           
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999021403

	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	
	Mr. Rosa M. Chandler .		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		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 a general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions.

3.  The applicant states in effect, that he believes that he was discharged for the wrong reason.  His service from 5 July 1978 through 4 July 1981 was honorable. His service began to go down hill in August 1981 when he went AWOL from Fort, Jackson, South Carolina, after his sister passed away and he was told that he could not go home

4.  On 5 June 1978, the applicant enlisted in the US Army Reserve (Delayed Enlistment Program (DEP) for a period of 6 years.  On 4 July 1978, he was discharged from the DEP.

5.  On 5 July 1978, he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 3 years and military occupational specialty (MOS) 19E (Armor Crewman).  He served successfully until 17 January 1981.  He had no recorded indisciplines or lost time.  However, there is no evidence of record that a  DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) was issued at the end of his first period of service.

6.  On 18 January 1981, he reenlisted in the RA for 3 years, and training in MOS 71L (Administrative Specialist) in pay grade E-4.  As a result of an academic failure, he was reassigned duties in his former MOS.

7.  On 27 November 1981, the applicant was found guilty by a summary court-martial for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 2 September - 5 October 1981.   He was sentenced to forfeiture of pay. 

8.  On 24 March 1982, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being AWOL from his unit from 6 March - 24 March 1982.  His punishment included reduction from pay grade E-4 to pay grade E-3, forfeiture of pay and 30 days at the Correctional Custody Facility (suspended).

9.  On 3 May 1982, the applicant was found guilty by a summary court-martial for again being AWOL from 27 April - 30 April 1982.  He was sentenced to reduction from pay grade E-3 to pay grade E-1, confinement at hard labor for 30 days and forfeiture of pay.  He remained in military confinement from 30 April through 
19 May 1982.

10.  The applicant's record is void of the facts and circumstances concerning the discharge process.  However, a prehearing review conducted by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 28 March 1994, shows that on 20 May 1982, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, for misconduct-frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  The applicant acknowledged notification, but the notification is undated.

11.  On 21 May 1982, the commander requested that a rehabilitative transfer be waived. 

12.  On 25 May 1982, he consulted with legal counsel, waived a hearing by a board of officers, and he did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The intermediate commander recommended approval.  

13.  On 2 June 1982, the separation authority waived rehabilitation and approved separation with a UOTHC discharge.  

14.  On 3 June 1982, both a medical examination and a mental status evaluation cleared the applicant for separation.  

15.  On 9 June 1982, the applicant was separated with a UOTHC discharge, under the provisions of chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200, for misconduct-frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. 

16.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant at the time of separation contained two errors.  Block 12a (Date Entered Active Duty (AD) This Period) showed 
16 April 1981, when in fact he had immediately reenlisted on l8 January l981.  Block 12c (Net Active Service This Period) showed that he had completed 
11 months and 9 days of creditable service.  

17.  On 13 September 1994, the applicant was issued a DD Form 215 correcting both these errors.  Block 12a was corrected to show his AD date as 18 January 1981.  Block 12c was corrected to show he had completed 1 year, 2 months and 7 days of creditable service at the time he was separated.

18.  On the enlistment under review he had 75 days lost time due to being AWOL and in confinement.  He also had 2 years, 6 months and 13 days total prior active service that is shown in Block, 12d (Total Prior Active Service) of his DD Form 214.

19.  On 28 March 1994, the ADRB denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge.

20.  Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter l4 established the policy and prescribed the procedures for separating members for misconduct due to frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  Action was to be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impracticable or unlikely to succeed.  A UOTHC discharge was normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an HD could have been awarded.

21.  Since l January l977, the policy of the Army has been not to issue a separate DD Form 2l4 at the end of each tour of active service, but only when the soldier completes a continuous period of active duty, whether it is one enlistment or several enlistments.  An appropriate discharge certificate is issued after each period of service.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's UOTHC discharge issued on 9 June 1982, for frequent involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, was administratively correct and in conformance with the applicable regulations then in effect.

2.  The Board determined that both the characterization of service and the narrative reason for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  The Board emphasizes with the applicant in the loss of his family member, but the Board determined that he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance with his grief, and personal problems without committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review.

4.  However, it also appears that he should have been considered as having been issued a complete an unconditional separation for the honorable period of service from 5 July 1978 - 17 January 1981.  This period of service was fully satisfactory, without recorded indisciplines or lost time.  

5.  Since no DD Form 2l4 was issued at the completion of his first period of service, it would be appropriate at this time to issue, as an exception to policy, a new DD Form 2l4 covering the period of service from 5 July 1978-17 January 1981, a period of service of 2 years, 6 months and l3 days.  The DD Form 
2l4 should show that he was honorably separated at that time for the purposes of immediate reenlistment (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code of KMH, reentry eligibility (RE) code of RE-1).  

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:

	a.  that the individual concerned was eligible for a complete and unconditional separation from the military at the time of his honorable discharge on 17 January 1981; and 

	b.  that the individual concerned was issued a DD Form 214, as an exception to policy, which covered his first period of service from 780605-810117, when he was honorably separated, for the purpose of immediate reenlistment (SPD code of KMH, RE code of RE-1), with credit for 2 years, 
6 months and 13 days active service. 

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

BOARD VOTE:  

FNE_____  LEM____  MVT____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999021403	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990728	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UOTHC)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19820609	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Chapter 14	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A61.00	
2.	A93.09	
3.	A94.55	
4.		
5.		
6.