RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  22 February 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060012541 


	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.




	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration of his request that his general discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

2.  The applicant essentially states that his sick call visits in the summer of 1975 for nervousness, anxiety, and insomnia are sufficient proof that he was mentally ill during the time preceding his discharge from the service in lieu of a trial by court-martial.  He also states, in effect, that the fact that he had flat feet and was not allowed to seek medical attention, and that after complaining of foot pain after long walks during basic training, he subsequently developed psychological problems and other physical problems as a direct result of this.

3.  The applicant provides the following evidence in support of this application:

	a.  a letter, dated 14 August 2006, along with two Standard Forms 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care);

	b.  a DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Records), with correspondence from the Department of Veterans Affairs related to his claim for compensation, rating decision, and his flat feet; 

	c.  a self-authored letter, dated 3 July 2006, addressed to this Board; and

	d.  a self-authored letter, dated 3 July 2006, addressed to the DVA office in Louisville, Kentucky authorizing them to have copies of his service medical records forwarded to this Board.

4.  The DVA Louisville, Kentucky Regional Office also provided a copy of the applicant’s service medical records as he requested.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20050008498, on 13 April 2006.

2.  The applicant’s military personnel records were requested from the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri; however, as none were received, they were either not available or no longer exist.  However, the applicant and the DVA Louisville, Kentucky Regional Office provided sufficient documents to prepare a fair and impartial review of this case. 

3.  The crux of the applicant’s new evidence is that he believes that his sick call visits in the summer of 1975 for nervousness, anxiety, and insomnia are sufficient proof that he was mentally ill during the time preceding his discharge from the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He also stated, in effect, that the fact that he had flat feet and was not allowed to seek medical attention, and that after complaining of foot pain after long walks during basic training, he subsequently developed psychological and other physical problems as a direct result.

4.  The applicant’s service medical records contained a Standard Form 700, which essentially shows that he was seen by medical personnel on 10 June 1979, and that he complained of nervousness and lack of sleep for the past 
2 weeks.  It also stated that he was having problems at home and work, and had been upset about it.  It also essentially shows that he was diagnosed with temporary insomnia, and provided some over-the-counter medication.  This document shows that he was seen the next day for headaches.  The reverse of this document shows that he was seen again on 1 July 1975 for nerves, and that the applicant stated that he had insomnia for the past 3 days.  It was also noted that outside of these instances, there are no further entries regarding nervousness, anxiety, or insomnia.

5.  It was noted that the applicant, in his 3 July 2006 letter to this Board, essentially stated that the Board offered no explanation as to why he was never referred to a psychologist or psychiatrist after he requested medical care for headaches and insomnia as a result of “problems at work and home.”  However, the applicant provided no evidence that shows that he requested to see a psychologist or psychiatrist and was denied the opportunity.  

6.  It was also noted that during the timeframe of these medical entries, charges were being preferred against the applicant for an offense or offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge, and that the requested a discharge under Chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel) in lieu of a court-martial.  

7.  The applicant also essentially stated that he had flat feet, and that because he wasn’t allowed to seek medical treatment for flat feet, he subsequently developed psychological and other physical problems as a direct result.  However, there is no evidence that the applicant suffered from flat feet while on active duty.  Additionally, his medical examination which was conducted during his processing for a Chapter 10 discharge specifically shows in Item 36 (Feet) on his Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination) that his feet were normal.

6.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  The regulation provides that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity.  The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his request that his general discharge be changed to a medical discharge be reconsidered.

2.  The contention that his sick call visits in the summer of 1975 for nervousness, anxiety, and insomnia are sufficient proof that he was mentally ill during the time preceding his discharge from the service in lieu of trial by court-martial was not accepted.  That fact that he was experiencing nervousness, anxiety, and insomnia while having charges preferred against him for an offense or offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge was not considered abnormal.  That coupled with the fact that there are no other instances of nervousness, anxiety, and insomnia other than when he was having charges preferred against him for an offense or offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge, indicates that those medical conditions were temporary in nature, and event-related.

3.  Additionally, his contention that flat feet he claims he was not allowed to seek medical attention for caused him to develop psychological and other physical problems is not corroborated by any evidence in his military records.  In fact, his medical examination conducted as part of his Chapter 10 proceedings specifically stated that the applicant’s feet were normal.    

4.  The Board does not doubt the veracity of the applicant’s claim to entitlement to a medical discharge.  The Board carefully considered all of the documents provided by the applicant, as well as his service medical records provided by the DVA Louisville, Kentucky Regional Office.  However, the Board concluded that the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence that he is entitled to a medical discharge.  


5.  It is clear that the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge.  It is also clear that he voluntarily requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  As the applicant did not provide any evidence which shows that any requirements of law and regulation were not met, or that his rights were not fully protected throughout the separation process, regularity must be presumed in this case.  As a result, the applicant's discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.  

6.  The applicant failed to provide any evidence which shows that an error or injustice occurred.  Absent, such evidence, regularity must be presumed in this case.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting relief to the applicant in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__MM ___  __JM___  ___QS __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20050008498, dated 13 April 2006.




_____ Mark Manning_______
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060012541
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070222
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19750811
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200, CHAPTER 10 
DISCHARGE REASON
DISCHARGE IN LIEU OF TRIAL BY CM
BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
AR 15-185
ISSUES         1.
108.0000.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.