MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            9 February 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999028458

	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.

	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter 		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:  That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.  
APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was obviously suffering from schizophrenic symptoms during his military service which led to his discharge.  He contends that if the Army had known about his condition at the time of his separation he would have received a medical or honorable discharge, not a general discharge.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his appeal to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, dated 7 April 1999; a letter from a psychiatrist dated 7 April 1993; and a copy of DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States), dated
16 June 1999.            

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

The applicant enlisted on 31 January 1973 for a period of 3 years.  Records show the applicant commenced two periods of AWOL (13 March 1973 to 
22 March 1973 and 31 March 1973 to 2 April 1973) while in basic training.  

On 9 April 1973 the applicant was notified of his pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, for fraudulent entry.  The unit commander recommended separation with a general discharge and based his recommendation on the applicant’s prior discharge from the Marine Corps (service from 23 June 1971 to 22 September 1971 and discharged for fraudulent enlistment) and concealment of this prior service.  The applicant consulted with counsel, waived his rights to a hearing of his case before a board of officers, representation by counsel and elected not to make a statement in his own behalf. He also acknowledged that he may encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a discharge under conditions other than honorable were issued. 

Prior to discharge, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation on 19 April 1973 and competent medical authority determined his behavior was normal, he was fully alert and fully oriented.  His mood was level, and the applicant’s thinking process was clear and his thought content was normal.  The medical doctor found that there was no significant mental illness noted, that the applicant had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, was mentally responsible and met the retention requirements of Army Regulation
40-501, chapter 3. 

The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for separation from the service on 14 May 1973 and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, on 18 May 1973, the applicant was discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, for fraudulent entry (concealment of prior service).  He had served 3 months and 13 days of total active service with 
13 days lost due to AWOL.      

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.

Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel for misconduct - fraudulent entry.  Paragraph 14-5a, provides in pertinent part, for concealment of prior service.  
Soldiers separated under this chapter may be awarded an honorable discharge, or a general discharge, or an undesirable discharge.

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 Board noted the applicant’s contentions that he was suffering with schizophrenic symptoms during his military service and that if the Army had known about his condition at the time of his separation he would have received a medical or honorable discharge.  However, evidence of record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation prior to his discharge and that competent medical authority determined that no significant mental illness was noted.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

3.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore 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

RVO____  DSJ_____  CJS_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028458	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000209	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(GD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19730518	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Chapter 14	
DISCHARGE REASON	Fraudulent entry (concealment of prior service)	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.0200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.