MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:             7 June 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999030848

	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. Walter Avery, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edwin S. Castle		Member	
	Mr. James P. Stueve		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 the reason and authority be corrected on his  DD Form 214 to show that he was separated for medical reasons or an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had mental problems which started during basic training and a substance abuse problem which started during his tour in Vietnam. In an effort to get out of the service he sought to no avail the assistance of the Chaplain at Fort Bliss, Texas.

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

He initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 January 1968, and was separated with an Honorable Discharge on 19 May 1969.  He reenlisted on 20 May 1969 and was separated on 25 June 1971 with an under honorable conditions discharge for unsuitability.  He completed training as a wheel vehicle mechanic, but also served as a Hawk anti-aircraft fire control operator.  He served a tour of duty in Germany, served one month and six days in Vietnam, and achieved the rank of Specialist Five.

On 4 June 1971 while assigned to Fort Bliss, Texas the applicant’s commander advised the applicant that discharge proceedings under the provision of           AR 635-212 had been initiated for his elimination from the service for the reason of unsuitability.  It was noted that the applicant demonstrated no initiative, interest or desire to accomplish anything beneficial to the military while assigned to the unit.  The applicant went absent without leave (AWOL) on three occasions.  On four separate occasions, the applicant was counseled by the Brigade Chaplain, but all attempts to resolve the applicant’s problems failed.  Further attempts at rehabilitation were not recommended.  The applicant’s conduct and efficiency ratings indicated that he had served well until 1971.

In addition to verbal and written counselings the applicant received three      Article 15s for his infractions.  In connection with his discharge proceedings, he indicated by his initials that he had received legal counsel, and that he waived his right to appear before a board or submit a statement on his own behalf.  In addition, by his signature he indicated that he understood the action contemplated against him and its effect on him.

On 7 June 1971 the Brigade Chaplain signed a letter that addressed his contact with the applicant.  The chaplain wrote “I have counseled the applicant on numerous occasions during the past six months concerning his personal problems.  On 24 May 1971 the applicant called me requesting help.  At that time, he was AWOL from his unit and claimed to be high on drugs.  He would not give his location, but came into my office the next morning of his own free will.  He was referred by me to Mental Hygiene for psychiatric evaluation.  The applicant has been habitually in trouble in his units and is presently assigned to the            
2nd Battalion 52nd Artillery (Provisional) in an attempt at rehabilitation.  The applicant has many serious problems with which he cannot seem to cope, he has recently turned to drugs as an escape.  It is my recommendation that the applicant be eliminated from the service as being unfit.  I feel this would be in the best interest of the U.S. Army.”

Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 3-2b states in pertinent part that disability compensation is not an entitlement acquired by reason of service-incurred illness or injury; rather, it is provided to soldiers whose service is interrupted and they can no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability incurred or aggravated in service.

That paragraph goes on to say that when a member is being separated by reason other than physical disability, his continued performance of duty creates a presumption of fitness which can be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that he was unable to perform his duties or that acute grave illness or injury or other deterioration of physical condition, occurring immediately prior to or coincident with separation, rendered the member unfit.

Title 10, United States Code, Chapter 61, provides disability retirement or separation for a member who is physically unfit to perform the duties of his office, rank, grade or rating because of disability incurred while entitled to basic pay.

Army Regulation 635-212, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness and unsuitability. 
It provided, in pertinent part, for the discharge due to unsuitability of those individuals with character and behavior disorders.  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 applicant contends that it was his attendance at basic training and service in Vietnam and at Fort Bliss, Texas that caused his mental problems.  He does not give any specific information on what mental problems he believes he has.  He provided no evidence nor does his records reveal any evidence to support his contention.  The applicant’s records in fact reflect he completed both basic and advanced individual training and had an ordinary career during his first enlistment, earning an honorable discharge.  The applicant spent just over one month in Vietnam.  Absent evidence to the contrary, the Board finds it highly unlikely that such a short tour could have been the cause of the applicant’s subsequent misbehavior and substance abuse.
2.  The applicant indisputably acted in an irrational manner while in the Army.  However, absent evidence to show that his behavior was a result of mental illness, and not simply a bad attitude or the result of substance abuse, he was not eligible to be considered for a medical discharge.  As such his discharge under honorable condition for unsuitability was and is appropriate and there is no reason to change it.

3.  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___  ___esc__  ___jps___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030848	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000607	
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.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.