MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           27 November 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001057829

	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. Stephanie Thompkins		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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:  In effect, upgrade of his general discharge to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was medically disabled due to a psychiatric condition that was undiagnosed during his military service.  He submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214) in support of his request.

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

He enlisted in the Army for 3 years as a private, pay grade E-1, on 17 May 1962.

On 2 February 1963, he was convicted by summary court-martial of leaving his post as a sentinal before he was regularly relieved.  He was sentenced to hard labor for 45 days and forfeiture.

On 22 April 1963, he was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for disobeying the lawful order of a senior noncommissioned officer.  His punishment included extra duty, restriction for 14 days, forfeiture and an oral admonition.

On 13 May 1963, he was referred to the psychiatric clinic for evaluation.  The evaluation history states the applicant had been transferred 7 different times since his arrival in Europe because of his inability to get along with officers.  The subject had made several suicidal attempts, all of them by hanging.  The last one was in February 1963 and resulted in being seen by a psychiatrist who at that time recommended an expeditious administrative separation.  

The evaluation also stated that the applicant had inadequate social adjustments virtually all of his life.  He was impulsive and his behavior was unpredictable.  It was urged that the applicant be administratively separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, as soon as possible.  The diagnosis was “inadequate personality, not in line of duty and not due to own misconduct.”

On 24 May 1963, his commander recommended him for elimination under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 stating that attempts to rehabilitate the applicant and numerous counseling had been to no avail.  The applicant had not been considered for elimination sooner because the results of his psychiatric examination had not yet returned.  

On the same day, after declining counsel the applicant acknowledged his proposed elimination from the service and waived his rights to a hearing before a board of officers.  He also declined to submit a statement in his own behalf. 

On 25 May 1963, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ for failing to report to reveille formation and work formation.  His punishment included extra duty, forfeiture and reprimand.

On 11 June 1963, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s separation and directed that the applicant be separated with a general discharge, under honorable conditions, by reason of character and behavior disorder.

His separation physical and mental evaluation dated 21 June 1963, shows his profile as 1/1/1/1/1/1/1, and his physical category as A.  

He was separated on 29 June 1963, with a general discharge, under honorable conditions, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, prior to the expiration of his term of service. He had a total of 1 year, 1 month and 13 days net active service.

There is no record that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-209, then in effect, established the policy and provided procedures for prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unsuitable for further military service.  It specified that action will be taken to discharge an individual when it is clearly established that it is unlikely the individual will develop sufficiently to participate in further military service and/or become a satisfactory soldier, or the individual’s psychiatric or physical condition is such as not to warrant discharge for disability.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.

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 applicant is not entitled to upgrade of his general discharge to honorable. He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he now requests.

2.  His contentions have been noted; however, there is no evidence of record, nor has the applicant provided any, that he had an undiagnosed psychiatric condition during his military service or that his discharge was in error or unjust.  His records clearly show that his medical evaluation concluded he was diagnosed with “inadequate personality, not in line of duty and not due to own misconduct.”  It is well documented the applicant received proper consideration for this discharge. 

3.  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.

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

_aao____  _jtm____  _le_____    DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001057829	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011127	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A70	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.