APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that her records be corrected by changing the reason for her discharge. APPLICANT STATES: She makes no statements, but cites her Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) case; two previous DD Forms 293 (one requesting a change in her reentry code; one requesting the reason for her separation be changed because she had been made a scapegoat for the combat death of a fellow soldier in Panama in 1989. She believes a superior in her chain of command actually killed the soldier.) She also mentions “witness of substantial and relevant evidence,” with name and previously-held position, but no supporting documentation from that individual is attached to the application. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant’s military records are not available. Information herein was obtained from alternate sources. She was born on 17 April 1963. She enlisted on 1 May 1986. She completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 31M (Multi-Channel Communications System Operator). On 9 August 1989, the applicant was admitted to Gorgas Army Hospital, Panama for an alcohol problem. She was diagnosed with paranoid disorder, provisional; alcohol intoxification, resolved; and alcohol abuse, continuous. On 2 October 1989, the applicant completed the Alcohol Rehabilitation Center program and was returned to full duty. A psychiatric evaluation completed at Gorgas Army Hospital diagnosed the applicant as borderline personality disorder with paranoic features; mixed personality disorder with borderline paranoid features. The separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-31, Personality Disorder, is not available. On 16 February 1990, the applicant was honorably discharged in pay grade E-4 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-31, personality disorder. She received a reentry code of “3.” She had completed 3 years, 9 months and 16 days of creditable active service with no lost time. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 5, paragraph 5-31, sets the policy and prescribes procedures for separating members with a personality disorder (not amounting to a disability) that interferes with assignment to or performance of duty when so diagnosed by a physician trained in psychiatry and psychiatric diagnosis. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the U.S. Army Reserve. Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment. That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes. RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waiverable. Recruiting personnel have the responsibility for initially determining whether an individual meets current enlistment criteria. They are required to process a request for waiver under the provisions of Chapter 4, Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program. Therefore, since enlistment criteria does change, and since an individual has the right to apply for a waiver, the applicant should periodically visit her local recruiting station to determine if she should apply for a waiver. On 19 November 1996, the ADRB denied the applicant’s request to change the reason for her discharge. 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. 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 the aforementioned requirement. 2. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. 3. There is no basis for removal of the RE code from the applicant’s record. The disqualification upon which the code was based, however, can be waived for reenlistment purposes. 4. 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 DENY APPLICATION Loren G. Harrell Director