MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           21 September 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000045773

	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. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	
	Mr. Eric N. Andersen		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:  That he has a congenital deformity of his right wrist but was still allowed to enter basic training.  A profile restricted his physical activities. A medical discharge was being pursued when a series of conflicts with his supervisor resulted in his general discharge.  He was under psychiatric care at the time and on medication.  He enlisted for and trained honorably for the position of medical technician.  His limitations were disclosed up front.  He provides no supporting evidence.

COUNSEL STATES:  Counsel makes no statement.

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

He had received an approved medical waiver to enlist in the Regular Army on    19 March 1997.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 91B (Medical Specialist).  

On 9 September 1997, the applicant was treated for wrist pain with joint pain with several follow-up treatments.

Between 6 November 1997 and 23 January 1998, the applicant received six General Counseling Forms, DA Form 4856, for various infractions of discipline.

On 22 January 1998, the applicant was given a physical profile for having right wrist pain and assignment limitations of no pushups and no wrench or hammer use.

On 6 February 1998, the applicant’s commander revoked his on-post driving privileges.  The justification given was the applicant’s limited use of his right arm caused by his wrist pain and the applicant’s having a car with standard transmission.  

On 6 February 1998, the applicant underwent a medical board/separation physical examination and was found to be qualified for medical evaluation board/physical evaluation board separation for his wrist condition.

On 23 February 1998, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  He was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with anxious mood.  He was found to be mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to have the mental capability to understand and participate in proceedings.  He was psychiatrically cleared for any action deemed appropriate by his command.  The applicant denied any suicidal ideation/plans/intentions.  He admitted to frequent (suicidal) thought but no actual intent.

On 27 February 1998, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.  He did not appeal the punishment.

On 10 March 1998, the applicant’s mental status was re-evaluated.  He was diagnosed with a depressive disorder, not specified, and with a personality disorder.  It was noted he had a low potential for self-harm/harm to others if allowed to leave the military service without a dishonorable discharge.  It was also noted that he had had chronic suicidal thoughts which had been longstanding and increased under stress.  Stress of military service was evident. It was recommended that his unit allow him to complete his pending medical board and leave the military service as soon as possible. 

On 6 April 1998, the applicant’s mental status was re-evaluated.  It was noted that his unit’s attempts to change his longstanding character problems only exacerbated his hopeless feelings and suicidal thoughts.  It was recommended that he be processed for expeditious administrative separation at the unit’s discretion.  It was determined that he met psychiatric criteria for separation and that he did not have a severe mental disorder and was not considered to be mentally impaired.

On 7 April 1998, the applicant’s commander requested that the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, Eliminations Section prepare an elimination packet on the applicant for patterns of misconduct.

On 22 April 1998, the applicant’s commander signed an elimination packet on the applicant for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14 for misconduct – patterns of misconduct.  The reasons cited by the commander were the applicant’s lying to a noncommissioned officer, being disrespectful towards noncommissioned officers, failing to obey orders, missing movement downrange, and being absent from or late to numerous formations.  The commander recommended the applicant receive a general discharge.

On 23 April 1998, the applicant was advised by consulting counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action.  Although he requested consideration of his case by a board of officers and appearance before such a board, he was not eligible for board consideration since he had less than 6 years of service.  He elected to submit a statement on his behalf but no statement is available.

On 27 April 1998, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed the applicant receive a general discharge.

On 4 May 1998, the applicant was discharged, with a general discharge, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct.  He had completed 1 year, 1 month and 16 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed and an unfit medical condition is not the direct or substantial contributing cause of his misconduct.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the soldier’s overall record.  

Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability.  The regulation defines “physically unfit” as unfitness due to physical disability.  The unfitness is of such a degree that a soldier is unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating in such a way as to reasonably fulfill the purposes of his employment on active duty.  Paragraph 4-3 states that an enlisted soldier may not be referred for, or continue, physical disability processing when action has been started under any regulatory provision which authorizes a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  If a case comes within these limitations, the commander exercising general court-martial jurisdiction over the soldier may abate the administrative separation.  The general court-martial convening authority (GCMCA) may refer a case file to the Physical Evaluation Board if the GCMCA finds that the disability is the cause, or a substantial contributing cause, of the misconduct that might result in a discharge under other than honorable conditions or finds that other circumstances warrant disability processing instead of alternate administrative separation.

On 30 June 2000, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his 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.  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. 

3.  The Board concludes that there is no evidence to show that the applicant’s medical condition was the cause or a substantial contributing cause of his misconduct.  Therefore, once action was started to separate him under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, which authorized a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, it was appropriate that his physical disability processing be stopped.

4.  Considering the applicant’s one Article 15 and his other numerous, though minor, infractions of military discipline, the characterization of his discharge as general is appropriate.

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

__jhl___  __clg___  __ena___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000045773	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000921	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19980504	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch 14.  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	A60.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.