IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        21 August 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080010631 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration of his earlier request to upgrade his undesirable discharge, characterized as under other than honorable conditions, to a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states that his military service was the one thing in his life that he is most proud of.  His out-processing records clearly show several references to his emotional state.  His interview with mental hygiene consisted of his relating his story of institutionalization and treatment to a technician.  He was told by the technician that with what he had stated he could get no less than a general discharge under honorable conditions for medical reasons.  The technician told him that to do so he would have to be court-martialed, which could take several months.  The technician felt the applicant was not emotionally stable to endure that ordeal.  That was the reason it was never pursued.  If his diagnosis had been known, his disposition would have been completely different.  

3.  The applicant states that his records show evidence of a model career Soldier’s path.  He was one of the first military surgical technicians to become nationally certified.  At one point, he was even nominated for the Walter Reed Army Institute of Nursing.  As his most recent psychiatrist states, that clearly shows a break from reality.  Not exactly the record of a person who would rationally go absent without leave (AWOL) for an extended period of time and be fully aware of the consequences.  During his second enlistment, he snapped.  He walked off post and just did not know why until he received the diagnosis of schizophrenia on 29 October 1975.

4.  The applicant provides two psychiatric medical statements, one dated          29 October 1975 and one dated 24 May 2007.

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 AR20070009839 on 14 November 2007.

2.  The evidence provided by the applicant was previously considered; however, he provides new arguments that will now be considered.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 September 1971.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91D (Operating Room Specialist). He was assigned to the Medical Company, Medical Department Activity, Fort Lee, VA, on or about 5 June 1972.  

4.  On 17 June 1973, the applicant was honorably discharged and immediately reenlisted for station of choice (Fort Knox, KY).  He was assigned to the Medical Company, Medical Department Activity, Fort Knox, KY, on or about 16 July 1973. At the end of his stabilization period, he was assigned to Germany.  He was assigned to the 128th Combat Support Hospital, Ludwigsburg, Germany, on or about 12 August 1974.

5.  On 18 April 1975, the applicant departed AWOL.

6.  On 29 October 1975, while still AWOL, the applicant was seen by an Associate Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Kentucky Medical Center.  The Center’s History-Physical-Progress Notes indicated that an MMPI (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (a psychological test)) of the applicant revealed a presentation of a pseudoneurotic schizophrenia.  The applicant appeared to be a shy, quiet, withdrawn, sensitive man.  There were signs of severe depression as well as strong feelings of inadequacy and inferiority.  He presented signs of having great difficulty in interpersonal relations. The History-Physical-Progress Notes indicated that his present state of decompensation was probably best explained as resulting from a depressive reaction which had been overlaid on a premorbid borderline personality.

7.  On 19 January 1976, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from on or about 18 April 1975 to on or about            12 January 1976.
8.  On 13 January 1976, the applicant completed a separation physical examination.  His Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History) had noted in item 29 (Physician’s summary and elaboration of all pertinent data) that the applicant was presently receiving outpatient psychiatric treatment for an adjustment problem.  He was found to be qualified for separation.

9.  On 21 January 1976, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation     635-200, chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He was advised of the effects of an undesirable discharge and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration [now known as the Department of Veterans Affairs] benefits.  He submitted a statement in his own behalf.

10.  In his statement, the applicant stated that he originally enlisted in the Army after being notified by the Selective Service that he was about to be drafted.  Although he was a pacifist, he made himself believe that by enlisting in a medical MOS he was not directly supporting the cause of the Army (that is, killing).  After some 21 months, he reenlisted and was stationed near home for one year, still content with his false reasoning.  After his year of stabilization, he was sent to Germany.  During the seven months he was in Germany he did not work in a hospital at any time.  Instead of doing a useful, meaningful job he was given busy work and experienced a good deal of harassment.  At that time, he realized he was lying to himself and that in actuality he was supporting the Army’s cause.  Due to family problems in the States, he and his wife returned on leave and attempted several methods of either being reassigned or discharged.  With no luck in those attempts, combined with his personal convictions, he decided to go AWOL.  At that time, he could see no possible way his beliefs and convictions could allow him to remain in the military.

11.  On 29 January 1976, the applicant was evaluated by a behavioral science specialist under the supervision of a psychiatrist at the Fort Knox, KY, Mental Hygiene Clinic.  The psychiatrist concurred with the behavioral science specialist that there was no underlying, previously unrecognized or medically disqualifying emotional illness.  It was further noted that the applicant was mentally responsible, that he was able to distinguish right from wrong, and that he possessed the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  

12.  On 6 February 1976, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request and directed he receive an undesirable discharge with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service.

13.  On 23 February 1976, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  He had completed a total of 3 years, 8 months, and 14 days of creditable active service and had 269 days of lost time.

14.  The applicant provided a civilian psychiatric narrative summary, dated        24 May 2007, which stated he was currently being treated for schizoaffective bipolar disorder with psychosis, with features of post-traumatic stress disorder and cannabis abuse.

15.  The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to upgrade his discharge.  In his application to the ADRB, he stated that he was a better-than-average Soldier.  He and his wife had problems with being away from home and friends, a lack of adequate housing, and never having enough money to make ends meet.  They were not prepared for the scene in Germany of racial tensions, alcoholism and drug abuse, and apathetic attitudes from the ranks as well as cadre.  He got involved with alcohol and hash and did a complete turn around from being a model Soldier.  His wife became dissatisfied and wanted to return to the States.  He went on leave and tried several ways to avoid returning to Germany, to no avail.  So he went AWOL.  He had an emotional breakdown after getting a job while in an AWOL status.  On 16 October 1981, the ADRB denied his request to upgrade his discharge.

16.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the 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.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.  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.

17.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

18.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) states, in pertinent part, that an enlisted Soldier may not be referred for, or continue, physical disability processing when action has been started under any regulatory provision which authorizes a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions unless the general court-martial convening authority finds that the disability is the cause, or a substantial contributing cause, of the misconduct that might result in a discharge under other than honorable conditions or that other circumstances warrant disability processing instead of alternate administrative separation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s separation physical papers do show several references to his emotional state.  However, as he noted in his application to the ADRB, his emotional breakdown did not come until after he had already departed AWOL. 

2.  The applicant provided a number of reasons, in his statement with his request for discharge and in his statement to the ADRB, as to why a model Soldier might consider going AWOL for an extended period of time – after serving as an operating room specialist during his Stateside assignments he was given busy work after he was assigned to Germany; he experienced harassment while in Germany; he realized he was lying to himself and that he was supporting the Army’s cause (i.e., instead of remaining true to his pacifist beliefs); he and his wife had problems with being away from home and friends, with a lack of adequate housing, and never having enough money to make ends meet; and he and his wife were not prepared for the racial tensions, alcoholism drug abuse, and apathetic attitudes from the rank and file Soldiers as well as from cadre.  The applicant admitted that he got involved with alcohol and hash and did a complete turn around from being a model Soldier.  None of these reasons indicate he was suffering from a mental disorder.

3.  The applicant contended that his most recent psychiatrist states that the applicant’s actions clearly show a break from reality.  However, his 29 October 1975 MMPI interpretation did not even hint that the applicant had lost touch with reality.  He was “shy, quiet, withdrawn, and sensitive.”  He had “great difficulty in interpersonal relations.”  He most probably had a “depressive reaction.”  There were signs of severe depression, but that could have been a reaction to or a result of his being AWOL.  There is nothing to indicate it was the cause of his going AWOL.



4.  Since there is no evidence that the applicant had a mental disorder that caused him to go AWOL, there is insufficient evidence to show that he would have been eligible for physical disability processing and insufficient evidence that would warrant upgrading his discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__xx____  ___xx___  ___xx___  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 AR20070009839 dated 14 November 2007.



      ________xxxx__________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080010631



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080010631



6


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1