MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  2 February 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025468

	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. Theodore G. Heartley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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:  Correction of his records by upgrading his general discharge to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  The applicant made no statement.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

On 25 August 1970, he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years.  He successfully completed his basic combat training at Fort Lewis, Washington on 29 October 1970.  On 16 November 1970, he began advanced individual training (AIT) in the medical care career field, military occupation specialty (MOS) 91A, at Fort Sam Houston, Texas.  

On 16 February 1971, he departed AWOL and remained absent until 12 March 1971.  On 16 March 1971, non-judicial punishment by field grade Article 
15, UCMJ, was imposed against him for AWOL.  His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $74.00 per month for 2 months, the second month suspended for 
90 days, 30 days of restriction, and 45 days of extra duty.  

On 31 March 1971, he was convicted by summary court-martial for being absent from his extra duty detail on 28 March 1971 and for breaking his restriction.  His punishment included forfeiture of $80.00 per month for 1 month, hard labor without confinement for 15 days, and reduction to private (PVT E-1).

His medical records show that between 23 September 1970 and 22 March 1971, he sought medical treatment for a variety of ailments including ingesting 20 to 
40 aspirins, abdominal cramps, insomnia, loss of appetite, worry, anxiety, bilateral knee pain, severe headaches, hearing loss, and upper and lower back pain.  During this same period, he received a 7-day temporary profile for no physical training due to his abdominal cramps and dizziness.  He was also referred for mental evaluation.

On 26 April 1971, he was assigned to Fort Jackson, South Carolina for completion of his AIT in MOS 71B, unit clerk.

On 13 May 1971, a report of psychiatric evaluation diagnosed him with a chronic severe schizoid personality manifested by characteristics of a loner, withdrawn, unable to accept stress, unable to adjust to military life, and poor
insight and judgement.  The report further indicated that his condition existed prior to his entry into military service (EPTS) and represented a long-standing, refractory personality disorder which was not amenable to disciplinary action, psychotherapy, reclassification, or reassignment.  The report also indicated that he had no mental defects sufficient to warrant separation through medical 

channels under the provision of Army Regulation (AR) 635-40; and that he was mentally responsible to distinguish right from wrong and adhere to the right and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  The report recommended that he be expeditiously discharged for the good of the service in accordance with the provisions of AR 635-212.  He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative or judicial action deemed appropriate by his command.

On 19 May 1971, his unit commander initiated separation proceedings for unsuitability based on his character and behavior disorders as noted in his psychiatric evaluation.  His commander stated, in effect, that the reason for his failure to complete AIT and obtain an MOS were unknown although he was under mental health treatment at his previous duty station and the applicant did mention that his problems were caused by a nervous condition, inability to remain in one area too long, and a need to be alone.  His commander added that he often remained awake all night to overcome his nervousness and the resulting loss of sleep severely hindered his academic performance.

On 8 June 1971, the separation authority approved the command’s request and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

His DD Form 214, separation document, shows that he was separated from active duty in the rank of PVT E-1 on 22 June 1971, under the provisions of AR 635-212 after completing 9 months and 5 days of creditable service and 23 days of lost time.

Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness and unsuitability.  It
provided, in pertinent part, for discharge due to unsuitability because of apathy of those individuals who displayed a lack of appropriate interest and/or an
inability to expend effort constructively.  When separation for unsuitability was warranted, an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the
separation authority based upon the individual's entire record.

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

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 applicant’s request is not warranted when the evidence of record is considered.

2.  The Board concludes that there was nothing in the evidence of record nor did he submit any evidence to mitigate the circumstances of his general discharge to warrant a discharge upgrade.

3.  His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors that would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

5.  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

__CF____  __LE___  __JA___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025468	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000202	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19710622	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	UNSUITABILITY	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.