MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           7 September 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000044368

	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:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern, III		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 under honorable conditions be upgraded to fully honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was suffering from schizophrenia, multiple personality disorder, depression and an anxiety disorder when he enlisted and was not a suitable candidate for active duty.  These disorders were not diagnosed until about 10 years after his discharge.  He now desires an honorable discharge in order to apply for certain VA programs.  He provides his Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 September 1972.  He had completed the 8th grade and his Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) score was 24, category IV.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 36K (Field Wireman).  He never reported to his first duty station in Germany.

The applicant departed absent without leave (AWOL) from 29 March – 2 July 1973 and from 9 July – 14 August 1973.  He was apprehended by civil authorities on both occasions.  

On 28 August 1973, the applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation. The physical was completed by H. L. S___, civilian, M. D.  

A Commander’s Evaluation dated 30 August 1973 noted that the applicant had departed AWOL due to problems at home.  He could not adjust to military life and being away from home.  He would continue to go AWOL until his discharge was approved.

On 5 September 1973, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  No significant mental illness was found.  He was found to be mentally responsible, to be able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  The evaluation was completed by H. L. S___, civilian, M. D.  

On 26 September 1973, the commander of the Fort Knox, KY Personnel Confinement Facility recommended separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13-5b for unsuitability.  The commander noted that the action was based upon personality disorders.  The applicant was advised of his rights by counsel.  He waived his right to consideration of his case by a board of officers; waived personal appearance before a board; elected not to make a statement on his behalf; and waived representation by counsel.
On 28 September 1973, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

On 9 October 1973, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, for unsuitability.  He had completed 8 months and 24 days of creditable active service with 133 days of lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  At the time, Chapter 13 contained the policy and outlined the procedures for separating an individual for unsuitability when it was clearly established that it was unlikely that he would develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.

Army Regulation 635-200 was revised on 1 December 1976, following settlement of a civil suit.  Thereafter, the type of discharge and the character of service was to be determined solely by the individual's military record during the current enlistment.  Further, any separation for unsuitability based on personality disorder must include a diagnosis of a personality disorder made by a physician trained in psychiatry.  In connection with these changes, a Department of the Army Memorandum dated 14 January 1977, and better known as the Brotzman Memorandum, was promulgated.  It required retroactive application of revised policies, attitudes and changes in reviewing applications for upgrade of discharges based on personality disorders.  A second memorandum, dated        8 February 1978, and better known as the Nelson Memorandum, expanded the review policy and specified that the presence of a personality disorder diagnosis would justify upgrade of a discharge to fully honorable except in cases where there are "clear and demonstrable reasons" why a fully honorable discharge should not be given.  Conviction by general court-martial or by more than one special court-martial was determined to be "clear and demonstrable reasons" which would justify a less than fully honorable 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.  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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  

3.  The commander’s recommendation indicated that the applicant’s separation was based on personality disorders. However, there is no indication in the mental status evaluation to show that he was diagnosed with a personality disorder and he provides no evidence to show he was diagnosed at the time or later with such a disorder.  In addition, it cannot be determined if the M. D. who conducted the mental status evaluation was trained in psychiatry.  

4.  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

__cla___  __wtm___  __tbr___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000044368	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000807	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19731009	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch 13	
DISCHARGE REASON	A42.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.