MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           17 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001051287

	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	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John H. Kern		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		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:  The sister, on behalf of the disabled former service member (FSM), requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  She states that new medical evaluations and documentation demonstrate the FSM suffered severe schizophrenia during his service in the Army and it has escalated over the years.

She states that the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the FSM’s request for an upgrade of his discharge based upon no requirement for a medical examination.  She further states that a medical examination should have been performed after the FSM’s two periods of AWOL.  She states that the FSM is slowly degenerating and the illness is progressively worsening with age and time. She states that the FSM lives in an assisted living program and an upgrade of his discharge would allow him to receive veterans benefits.  In support of her application she submits a DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty), conservator certificate from the state of Connecticut, a copy of the ADRB decisional document, and associate medical documents pertaining to the FSM’s illness.

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

The FSM entered the Army on 30 September 1976, for a period of three years.  His highest rank attained was private (E-2).  He completed basic combat training, advanced individual training, and was subsequently assigned to Fort Stewart, Georgia.

While assigned to Fort Stewart, Georgia the FSM accepted nonjudical punishment (NJP) for disobeying a lawful order and for possessing marihuana.

The FSM went AWOL from 1 June 1977 to 23 June 1977.  He went AWOL again on 6 July 1977, and returned to military control on 5 October 1977, at the Personnel Control Facility, Fort Dix, New Jersey.

The FSM was notified on 7 October 1977, of the charges preferred against him for the two periods of AWOL.  After consulting with counsel he voluntarily submitted a request to be discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.

The request for discharge was approved by the appropriate authority and on 
28 October 1977, the FSM was discharged from the Army under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served 
9 months and 1 day of total active service and had 119 days of lost time due to AWOL.
The FSM submitted a request for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board, and it was denied on 17 February 1983. 

Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination) dated 7 October 1977, that cleared the FSM for separation, did not indicate that the FSM was suffering from any mental health problems.

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 court-martial charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  Although an honorable, or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

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 FSM’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.

2.  The FSM chose to request an administrative discharge rather than risk the consequences of a court-martial.  Although he may now feel that he made the wrong choice, he should not be allowed to change his mind at this late date.

3.  The evidence submitted by the applicant indicates that the FSM now suffers from schizophrenia.  The Board determined that the evidence is insufficient to determine that the disabled service member’s diagnosis of schizophrenia was the reason he exhibited acts of misconduct.

4.  The FSM’s separation medical examination dated 17 October 1977, that cleared him for separation, did not indicate that the FSM was suffering from any mental health problems.  The Board concludes that the FSM was medically fit for the approval authority to accept his request for separation in lieu of trial by court-martial. 

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

__JHK___  __MHM__  __MVT__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001051287	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010417	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	34.09	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.