MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  20 September 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001058710

	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. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Chairperson	
	Ms. Paula Mokulis		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		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 undesirable discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his undesirable discharge should be upgraded
because he was sick in the head and did not know.  In support of his application 
he submits a copy of a Form 4 (Attending Physician’s Statement) from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), dated 23 July 1998, a copy of his Standard Form 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care), a copy of a psychological consultation from his clinical psychologist for the DVA, a copy of his discharge proceedings, a copy of a VA Form 10-1000 (Discharge Summary) 
from the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Salisbury, North Carolina, and two DD Forms 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted on 11 March 1968 as a duty foreman (57G).  He served in Vietnam from 23 February 1969 to 23 February 1970 and was honorably discharged on 23 February 1970, due to early return of overseas returnees.  He was 
transferred to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training).  He reenlisted on 17 January 1974.

On 16 April 1974, he was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being disrespectful toward a noncommissioned officer.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and 7 days restriction and extra duty.

He was convicted by a summary court-martial on 9 July 1974 of being disrespectful towards a commissioned officer, failure to obey a lawful
order from a commissioned officer, and of breaking restriction.  His 
sentence consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of
pay, and extra duty and restriction for 25 days.

On 18 July 1974, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation which diagnosed the applicant as having an antisocial personality, chronic, moderate;
manifested by conflict with society, impulsiveness, inability to feel guilt or learn from experience, a low level of frustration tolerance, and a tendency to blame others.

The applicant departed AWOL on 29 July 1974 and remained AWOL until he was apprehended on 23 August 1974 (24 days).

On 26 August 1974, he consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  In doing so, he admitted 
guilt to the offenses charged and acknowledged that he might encounter 

substantial prejudice in civilian life and might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA) if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued.  He also elected to submit a statement in his own behalf; however, this statement is not present in the available records.

On 16 September 1974, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) reviewed the applicant’s case.  The SJA recommended that the applicant be separated from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13.  The SJA stated that the applicant had made up his mind that the Army is unfair to him, that he wants out, and that he had no insight into the possibility that his own behavior had led to the difficulties he was having, and recommended an undesirable discharge.

On 17 September 1974, the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, 
chapter 10, and directed that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 18 September 1974.  He had 
a total of 2 years, 7 months, and 20 days of creditable service and 24 days of
lost time due to AWOL.

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

The applicant’s medical records are unavailable for review by this Board.  

Medical evidence provided by the applicant shows that he was diagnosed as having Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), polysubstance dependence, in partial remission, mixed personality disorder, schizotypal and antisocial features. Medical evidence also stated that the applicant was unemployable due to chronic, severe PTSD and persistent symptoms of severe PTSD.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for 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, at any time after the charges
have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service
in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.  However, at the time of the applicant’s separation the regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable
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.  The Board notes that the applicant voluntarily requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-martial for his multiple act of misconduct and AWOL and was issued an undesirable discharge which was appropriate for his second period of service.

2.  The applicant contends that he was sick in the head and did not know; however, his psychiatric evaluation, which was prepared prior to his discharge,
diagnosed the applicant as having an antisocial personality, chronic, moderate; manifested by conflict with society, impulsiveness, inability to feel guilt or learn from experience, a low level of frustration tolerance, and a tendency to blame others.  

3.  The Board also notes the comments made by the applicant that he had made up his mind, that the Army was unfair to him, and that he wanted out.  The SJA noted that he had no insight into the possibility that his own behavior led to the difficulties he was having.

4.  The medical evidence provided by the applicant shows that he was diagnosed by the DVA in 1997 as having PTSD, chronic, polysubstance dependency, in partial remission, mixed personality disorder, that he was unemployable due to chronic, severe PTSD, and persistent symptoms of severe PTSD.  Absent convincing evidence that, at the time of the discharge or the behavior that led to the discharge, the applicant was so impaired by psychiatric, psychological, mental, or emotional problems that he could not both tell right from wrong and adhere to the right, the PTSD issue does not support or demonstrate an error or an injustice in the discharge.

5.  The applicant’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.  

6.  The type of separation directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case. 

7.  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.

8.  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

__rw___  __pm___  ___kl___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058710	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010920	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UOTHC	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19740918	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200  C, 10	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  189		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.		

4.  The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and
VA benefits.

That his undesirable discharge should be upgraded, that he was “sick in the head” when he was discharged on 23 February 1970 and nothing was done, that he could not keep a job on the outside, that he reentered the service on 17 January 1974, that everything continued to go wrong, and that he has not function right since 1968.  

The applicant provided a copy of a attending physician’s statement which diagnosed that applicant as having Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD), chronic, hearing impairment in his right ear, low back pain, and polysubstance abuse.  

The applicant provided a copy of his discharge summary which shows that he was diagnosed with chronic, severe, Vietnam War-induces PTSD in acute relapse; deferred; osteoarthritis of right ankle and knee with chronic pain; history of benign prostatic hypertrophy, gastroesophageal reflux diseases, and hyperlipidemia; hypertension aggravated by PTSD stress; osteoarthritis of back and neck with chronic neck and back pain; dermatitis; and problems with primary support groups, psychosocial, environment-related problems due to chronic PTSD.

2. emission, antisocial personality disorder with explosive/aggressive features, and history of chronic back injury, recurrent and severe headaches

The applicant’s medical records are unavailable for review by this Board.  He submits a copy of a clinical psychologist’s report from 6 March 1990.  The resulting diagnosis given was Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (provisional), alcohol dependence in remission, antisocial personality disorder with explosive/aggressive features, and history of chronic back injury, recurrent
contention that his discharge should be upgraded; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his contention or to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.
5.  The applicant’s first period of service was honorable and failed to show that the applicant

this evidence is not a sufficient basis to upgrade the applicant’s discharge for his second period of service. 

5.  The Board also notes that the applicant voluntarily requested separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, due to his AWOL and multiple acts of misconduct.