MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           16 April 2002      
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001063048

	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. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Ms. Melinda M. Darby		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, that her rank be restored to E-5 and that she be reimbursed $900 for a fine imposed following her special court-martial.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that due to a misdiagnosis at the time of her discharge, she requests reinstatement of her rank to E-5 and reimbursement of a $900 fine.  In support of her application, she submits a copy of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, dated 22 February 2000.

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

The applicant enlisted on 29 January 1970 for a period of 3 years.  She served as an occupational specialist, extended her enlistment for 2 years and was honorably discharged on 28 January 1975.  She reenlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve on 29 January 1975 for a period of 1 year.  The applicant entered active duty again on 27 February 1976 for a period of 4 years.

On 2 August 1977, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 18 April 1977 to 11 July 1977.  She was sentenced to be reduced to E-1, to forfeit $100 pay per month for 3 months and to be confined at hard labor for 3 months.  On 7 August 1977, the convening authority approved the sentence but suspended the confinement at hard labor for 6 months. 

On 3 April 1978, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for being AWOL from 7 March 1978 to 20 March 1978.  Her punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and forfeiture of $50.

The decision by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, dated 22 February 2000, in the applicant’s case indicates that her service medical records were available for review.  Her service medical records reveal that she underwent a psychiatric evaluation in May 1978 and was diagnosed with an immature personality with depressive features.  The Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision also states the psychiatrist strongly recommended that the applicant be administratively separated.

On 22 May 1978, the applicant was notified of her pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsuitability due to a personality disorder.

The available records do not contain a medical examination or psychiatric evaluation.

On 24 May 1978, the applicant’s unit commander initiated action to separate her under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsuitability due to a personality disorder.
On 5 June 1978, after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived consideration of her case by a board of officers, representation by counsel and elected not to submit a statement on her own behalf.

On 14 June 1978, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation and directed that the applicant be issued an honorable discharge.

Accordingly, the applicant was honorably discharged on 22 June 1978 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, for unsuitability due to a personality disorder.  She had served 6 years, 11 months and 21 days of total active service with 125 days lost due to AWOL.

There is no evidence in the available records which shows the applicant was promoted to E-5 following her special court-martial.

There is no evidence in the available records which shows a $900 fine was imposed upon the applicant.

In support of her claim, the applicant provided a copy of the decision by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, dated 22 February 2000, which granted service connection for major depression.

Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 provided for discharge due to unfitness and unsuitability.  Specific categories for unsuitability included inaptitude, character and behavior disorders, apathy, alcoholism and homosexuality.  The regulation also states that when separation for unsuitability was warranted an honorable or general discharge was issued as warranted by his/her military 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 contention that she was misdiagnosed at the time of her discharge.  However, medical evidence provided to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals shows that a psychiatrist diagnosed the applicant with an immature personality with depressive features in May 1978.  Evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsuitability due to a personality disorder on 22 June 1978.   

2.  The Board noted that the decision by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals granted service connection for major depression on 22 February 2000.  However, the rating action by the DVA does not necessarily demonstrate any error or injustice in the separation authority’s decision to separate the applicant from the Army.

3.  The Board noted the applicant’s request that her rank be restored to E-5. 
Evidence of record shows the applicant was reduced from E-5 to E-1 as the result of a special court-martial conviction for being AWOL.  There is no evidence that the applicant’s depression was the proximate cause of her AWOL.  There is also no evidence which shows the applicant was promoted to E-5 following her special court-martial or prior to her separation on 22 June 1978.    

4.  The Board also noted the applicant’s request that she be reimbursed $900 for a fine imposed following her special court-martial.  However, there is no evidence of record available to the Board, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which shows that she was fined $900.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant received a forfeiture of $100 pay per month for 3 months from her special court-martial and that she received a $50 forfeiture of pay from her nonjudicial punishment.  

5.  Based on the foregoing, there is no basis to restore rank or monies forfeited.  

6.  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.

7.  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

INW____  MMD____  JTM_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001063048	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020416	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	102.0200	
2.	128.1400	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.