BOARD DATE:	  23 October 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120004341 


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 reconsideration of the Board's denial of his previous request for a medical discharge.

2.  The applicant states the documents he has supplied tell a different version of events than what was indicated in the previous Board proceedings.  He also states he would like a hearing with the Board.

3.  The applicant provides numerous medical documents, a letter from his former spouse addressed to the Troop Medical Clinic (TMC), and certificate of divorce.

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 AR20100018256, on 25 January 2011.

2.  During its original review of the case, the Board found no evidence of mental disorder that would have affected the applicant's judgment and reasoning or that would have required disposition through medical channels.  A review of his history and treatment record showed no history of enduring mental illness that would have required resolution prior to an administrative separation.  The Board also concluded the applicant's separation for a pattern of misconduct was proper and equitable and that the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout 


the separation process.  The Board finally concluded the applicant's record of misconduct clearly supported the characterization of service and type discharge he received.

3.  The medical and other documents provided by the applicant are new evidence that warrants consideration by the Board.

4.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 March 2006 in pay grade E-1.

5.  He submits several medical documents indicating he was seen by medical personnel for a variety of medical issues.

6.  A review of these documents revealed the results of a routine post-deployment evaluation on 2 May 2008 that shows no significant psychiatric concern.  Depression was included in the list of medical problems.

7.  An emergency admission report, dated 12 September 2008, shows the applicant attempted suicide and indicated he was under increased stress secondary to being divorced.  The report shows a diagnostic impression of adjustment disorder with depressed mood.

8.  A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 8 October 2008, shows his behavior was found to be normal.  He was found to be fully alert and fully oriented, his mood or affect was unremarkable, his thinking process was clear, his thought content was normal, and his memory was good.  The evaluating psychologist, an Army Medical Service Corps officer, found him to be mentally responsible and considered him to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in separation proceedings.  He was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate.  The applicant's mental status was clear.

9.  On 18 December 2008, the applicant was discharged in the grade of E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, for a pattern of misconduct with a general discharge.  He completed 2 years,
9 months, and 18 days of creditable active service.

10.  There is no evidence he was diagnosed with severe depression or given a physical profile for these conditions during his period of active service.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for a pattern of misconduct.  Action will be taken to separate 


a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record.

12.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), in effect at the time, established the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES).  It sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier was unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating.  If a Soldier was found unfit because of physical disability, the regulation provided for disposition of the Soldier according to applicable laws and regulations.  Soldiers were referred into the PDES when they no longer met medical retention standards in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 3.

13.  Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  Paragraph 2-11 states applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR.  The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for a medical discharge has again been carefully considered.  However, there remains insufficient evidence to support this claim.

2.  Medical documents in his military records indicated he had problems with depression in part due to his divorce.  However, a DA Form 3822-R found no evidence of mental disorder that would have affected his judgment and reasoning or that would have required disposition through medical channels.  A review of his history and treatment record shows no history of enduring mental illness which would have required resolution prior to an administrative separation.

3.  His separation for a pattern of misconduct was proper and equitable and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.  He was properly discharged in accordance with pertinent regulations with due process. 

4.  The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was also carefully considered.  However, by regulation, an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the Board.  Hearings may be authorized by a panel of the Board or by the 


Director of the ABCMR.  In this case, the evidence of record and independent evidence provided by the applicant is sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision at this time.  As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not warranted to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100018256, dated 25 January 2011.



      __________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)                                         AR20120004341



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120004341



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1