MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:            7 August 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001056900

	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	
	Ms. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern		Member	
	Ms. Regan K. Smith		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 under honorable conditions discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was treated at the 8th Field Hospital for a suicide attempt and that his medical discharge summary shows his diagnosis as “psychoneurotic disorder, chronic”.  He provides a copy of his Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination), his Standard Form 89 (Report of Medical History), his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), a Department of Veterans Affairs Rating Decision, and a physician’s note, dated 1 December 1999 in support of his application.

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

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 December 1966 for a period of three years.  He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and served in Germany from 23 May 1967 through 29 January 1968 as an engineer equipment mechanic.  He reenlisted on 10 January 1968 for a period of three years.  He later was reclassified as a wheel vehicle mechanic and served in Vietnam from 12 March 1968 through 11 March 1969 and from 18 December 1969 through 17 December 1970.

On 4 August 1969 and 16 February 1970, the applicant was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failing to go to his appointed place of duty, for failing to obey a lawful order and for wrongfully appropriating a military vehicle.

On 24 April 1970, the applicant underwent a psychiatric examination which indicated that he had an emotionally unstable personality, chronic, moderate, manifested by anxiety, barbiturate dependence, difficulty with officers and noncommissioned officers, and excessive visits to sick call.  The applicant was found to be mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  The psychiatrist cleared the applicant for any administrative action, to include separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212.

On 25 June 1970, the applicant’s unit commander notified him of pending separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability with an undesirable discharge.  He cited as a basis for his recommendation as the applicant’s unwillingness to accomplish any task to which assigned; his provocation of incidents with his superiors and men; and his innate unwillingness to accept authority of any kind.  On 29 June 1970, the applicant submitted a statement in his own behalf.

The complete facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge proceedings are not present in his personnel records.  However, his DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged on 15 July 1970, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability – apathy, defective attitudes and inability to expend effort constructively and was issued a general under honorable conditions discharge.  He had 2 years, 6 months 6 days of creditable service on his current enlistment and 3 years, 6 months and 19 days total active military service.

The applicant provided a copy of Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination), 30 June 1970, which shows he had been treated for a chronic psychoneurotic disorder.  At that time, he was found to be medically qualified for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212.

There is no evidence of any medical condition which rendered the applicant medically unfit for retention on active duty.

Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness and unsuitability.  It provided, in pertinent part, for discharge due to unsuitability because of apathy of those individuals who displayed a lack of appropriate interest and/or an inability to expend effort constructively.  When separation for unsuitability was warranted an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual's entire record.

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 considered the applicant’s contentions that he was treated at the 8th Field Hospital for a suicide attempt and was diagnosed with “psychoneurotic disorder, chronic”.

2.  However, there are no medical records which indicate any medical condition incurred that would render the applicant medically unfit.  At the time of the separation physical examination, competent medical authority determined that the applicant was then medically fit for appropriate separation.  Accordingly, the applicant was separated from active duty for reasons other than physical disability.  

3.  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.

4.  Therefore, the type of discharge directed and the reasons for his separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

5.  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.

6.  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

MKP____  TBR_____  RKS____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001056900	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010807	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19700715	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unsuitability	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.