BOARD DATE:	  31 August 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100011114 


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, the widow of a deceased former service member (FSM),   requests her late husband's discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded.  

2.  The applicant states:

* The FSM served his country in a time of war (Gulf War)
* He suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and took his own life
* While in the Gulf War the FSM was exposed to situations he could not deal with and he began drinking
* Something happened in the military that eventually led to his discharge under other than honorable conditions
* He was unable to handle the emotional impact of serving his country
* She is left with a 10-year old son and no husband
* The Army failed to recognize he suffered from depression and PTSD
* The FSM suffered from alcoholism, depression, drug abuse, and PTSD 

3.  The applicant provides: 

* VA Form 21-4138 (Department of Veterans Affairs Statement in Support of Claim)
* Death certificate


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The FSM enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 January 1989 for a period of 4 years.  He successfully completed one station unit training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11M (fighting vehicle infantryman).  He served in Southwest Asia from 2 January 1991 to 19 May 1991.

2.  On 9 January 1992, charges were preferred against the FSM for using marijuana.

3.  On 13 January 1992, the FSM consulted with counsel and requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of court-martial.  He indicated that by submitting his request for discharge he acknowledged he was guilty of a charge against him that authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He indicated in his request that he understood he might be discharged under conditions other than honorable and furnished an under other than honorable conditions discharge, that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, that he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, and that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws.  He acknowledged that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He elected not to make a statement in his own behalf.  

4.  On 22 January 1992, the separation authority approved the FSM's voluntary request for discharge and directed that he be furnished an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

5.  Accordingly, the FSM was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 6 February 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He had served a total of 3 years and 12 days of creditable active service.

6.  There is no evidence of record which shows the FSM was diagnosed with any mental condition or alcohol dependency prior to his discharge.

7.  There is no indication in the available records which shows the FSM applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.

8.  The FSM died on 24 February 2008. 

9.  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, 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.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

11.  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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contentions were carefully considered.  However, there is no evidence to show the FSM was having mental problems in 1991/1992 that interfered with his ability to perform his military duties or that this was the underlying cause for the misconduct that led to his discharge.  There is also no evidence of record which shows he was diagnosed with alcohol dependency prior to his discharge.  It is noted he abused marijuana as evidenced by the court-martial charge. 

2.  Since the FSM's record of service included a drug-related offense for which a court-martial charge was preferred, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable or a general discharge.

3.  The FSM's voluntary request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. He had an opportunity to submit a statement in which he could have voiced his concerns and he failed to do so.

4.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  In view of the foregoing, regrettably, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x__  ___x_____  ____x____  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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




      _______ _   x_______   ___
               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)                                         AR20100011114





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100011114



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1