MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           18 July 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000041916

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		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 discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded and that his rank be restored.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was born a manic depressant and had his first episode of manic depression while in the military.  He has had many episodes since and is now being treated for manic depression.  He requested to see a doctor but was told to return to duty.  Had he known what he was dealing with and had he been treated while on active duty he would have made a better decision about how he departed from the military.  He provides no supporting evidence other than what was provided with his application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB).

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 March 1979.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).

The applicant was admitted to the hospital on 31 December 1980 with a diagnostic impression of an acute psychotic reaction.  He had eaten tunafish for lunch in the mess hall and thought he had been drugged or that someone had put “acid” in his food.  He stayed for 5 days, the remainder of his hospital course being unremarkable.  There was no evidence of a neurosis or psychosis.  There was no referral to the Community Mental Health Activity (CMHA) and he was returned to duty.  He returned for treatment on 7 January 1981 for complaints of headaches and being shaky.  He was seen by the CMHA and he was diagnosed with a hysterical reaction.  He was returned to duty and to return to the CMHA as required.

The applicant’s service medical records show he was treated on numerous occasions for various problems such as prostatitis, blurred vision, frostbite, knee and wrist injuries, a broken foot, and hearing problems but not again for “psychotic” or “hysterical” reaction problems.

The applicant was promoted to Sergeant, E-5 on 8 June 1982.  

The applicant, while assigned to Germany, departed absent without leave (AWOL) on 4 April 1983 and turned himself in to Fort Lewis, WA on 11 May 1983.
On 18 May 1983, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant charging him with being AWOL for the period 4 April until on or about 11 May 1983. 

On 18 May 1983, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits.  He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 27 May1983, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive a discharge UOTHC.

On 25 July 1983, the applicant was discharged with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had completed 4 years, 3 months and 18 days of creditable active service and had 36 days of lost time. 

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

Army Regulation 600-8-19 prescribes the enlisted promotions and reductions function of the military personnel system.  In pertinent part, it states that when the separation authority determines that a soldier is to be discharged from the Service under other than honorable conditions, he will be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.

In 1984, the applicant applied to the ADRB to upgrade his discharge.  He provided a 10 January 1984 letter from a chaplain.  The chaplain stated that the applicant had sought assistance in applying for a compassionate reassignment to Fort Lewis in April or May 1983.  At the time, both his wife and infant daughter were seriously ill and he felt his unit was not supporting him in dealing with their illnesses.  The applicant told the chaplain later that he had not been granted a reassignment so he had, with great reluctance, gone AWOL to take care of his wife and daughter.  The applicant informed the ADRB that he had been told before departing for Germany that he could take his family and that housing would be available in two months.  When he arrived he found that housing would not be available for a long time and he had to find housing on the economy at a considerable distance from the post and at a very high cost.  Then, when his wife and daughter became ill he was refused time off to take them to the doctor.  He was forced to choose between the Army and his family.  The ADRB denied the applicant’s request.
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.  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 this requirement.

2.  The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.  He provides no evidence to show that he ever sought treatment for “manic depression” type symptoms after January 1981 although the record shows he was treated for other conditions.  On the contrary, the record shows that he served well, even being promoted to Sergeant in June 1982.  In addition, for the two times he was treated for a “psychotic” or “hysterical” condition there is no medical evidence to show that he did not know right from wrong at any time.  

3.  The Board notes that the applicant made no statement in his own behalf when he submitted his request for discharge even though it appears that his concern for his wife and child would have been a reasonable mitigating factor at least in determining the type of discharge he would receive.  He did bring this factor up little more than 6 months later when he applied to the ADRB for an upgraded discharge.  

4.  There is no evidence of record to show that the applicant requested a compassionate reassignment.  There is no evidence to show that he attempted to obtain medical treatment for his family from the local medical treatment facility or hospital in Germany before turning himself in for AWOL at Fort Lewis, WA.  Again, even if the evidence did show that the applicant was a manic depressant at the time, there is no evidence to show that he would not have known that it was wrong to seek treatment for his family in the States before even trying to obtain treatment locally.  

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

__gdp___  __eb____  __mvt___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000041916	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000718	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19830725	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Ch 10	
DISCHARGE REASON	A70.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.