MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  8 December 1999 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999022629

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond, V. O’Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Huber		Member	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	     advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Reconsideration of his request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge (UD) to a fully honorable discharge (HD) in order to receive Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) benefits.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, even though he received a UD as a result misconduct, he believes that his discharge should be upgraded because, he suffered from paranoid schizophrenia and lacked personal restraint due to no fault of his own.  He sought medical treatment for schizophrenia immediately upon being discharged and has continued to take medication and receive counseling since that time.  In support of his request he submits a statement written in his own behalf, four personal statements from acquaintances, a written statement from a consulting psychiatrist, a DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), other separation documents, psychiatric interviews/assessments dated between 1992-1998, a prescription medication summary, and extracted portions of the Merck Manual on schizophrenic disorders.  He also claims his social security number is incorrect on his DD Form 214.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 18 July 1980 (COPY ATTACHED).

On 19 April 1971, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army, for 3 years.  In October 1971, he was assigned to Korea.  Between April 1972 and May 1972, he received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  On 6 April 1972, and on 19 April 1972, he accepted NJP for being absent without leave (AWOL) from his unit on 23, 25 and 27 March 1972, and from 10-11 April 1972.  He also accepted NJP for failure to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed on 27 April 1972. 

On 21 June 1972, charges were preferred against the applicant for purchasing items from the post exchange for illegal exchange or black marketing; for receiving military payment certificates (MPC's) from an unauthorized MPC holder (a Korean National); for possession of one ounce, more or less of marijuana; for possessing a stolen identification card and a ration control plate belonging to another soldier; for stealing a $10.00 fan from the main post exchange; for being absent without leave (AWOL) on 1 June 1972; and for breaking arrest twice, while confined to quarters.  

On 23 June 1972, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service.  On 27 June 1972, the 
discharge was approved with the issuance of a UD. 

The Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), Case Report and Directive, dated 18 July 1980, shows that on 9 July 1972 the applicant was found medically fit for separation. 

On 9 July 1972, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service with a UD.  He had completed 
1 year, 2 months and 17 days of active military service and he also had 4 days lost time due to being AWOL.

The applicant made a personal appearance before the ADRB, for an upgrade of his discharge in September 1973, and he also had a records review on 18 July 1980.  Both requests were denied.

A consulting psychiatrist at the Southside Community Services Board, South Boston, Virginia contends, in a written statement, dated 18 July 1998, provided by the applicant, that the schizophrenia process is often initialized between ages 18-25.  Initially a person may experience delusions of grandeur, hallucinations, paranoid delusions and subsequently impaired judgment.  Intellectually, a person may know right from wrong, but may not have the judgement to abide by the information.

The applicant’s military records show that the same social security number as shown on his DD Form 214 was used throughout his entire period of service.  
A handwritten number is shown above the social security number on his DD Form 214, but this is a DVA claim number which is different from the social security number.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

2.  The Board determined that available records show that the applicant was found medically qualified for separation, and therefore, appropriately discharged in accordance with regulations in effect at the time.  He has provided no probative evidence to the contrary.

3.  The type of discharge directed and the reason for discharge was appropriate considering the facts of the case.

4.  The applicant has provided no probative evidence that shows his social security number on his separation document is in error.

5.  Entitlement to veteran’s benefits is not a matter under the purview of this Board, but rests with the DVA.  Further, the lack of entitlements does not provide a basis upon which to grant an upgrade of a discharge.

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit
sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

RVO____  JPH____  AAO_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999022629	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19991208	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19720709	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, CHAPTER 10 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A04.00	
BOARD DECISION	(NC)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.0400	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.