MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           20 January 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-12358
                                              AR1998014467

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

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Michael L. Engle		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. June Hajjar		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert W. Garrett		Member	
	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his military records be corrected to show a reentry (RE) code of 1 or 2.

APPLICANT STATES: That, in effect, he was harassed and was not given the special privilege for which he had worked.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Georgia Army National Guard (ARNG) on 31 October 1985 for 8 years.  He successfully completed basic combat training and his advanced individual training as a track vehicle repairer.  He attained the rank of private first class (PFC).

On 19 December 1990 he was ordered to active duty for a period not to exceed 12 months in support of Operation Desert Shield/Storm.

On 8 May 1991 a medical evaluation board (MEB) found the applicant to be suffering from schizophrenia, disorganized, subchronic, manifested by delusions, marked loosening of associations and flattening of affect with delusional content noted to be bizarre at times, significant deterioration in occupational functioning during the first 6 months of illness, aggravated by polysubstance abuse and present continuously between 12 and 18 months; stress severe.  The MEB concluded that the applicant’s condition originated while he was on active duty.  The MEB recommended that the applicant be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  The applicant agreed with the MEB’s findings.

On 21 May 1991 a PEB convened, reviewed the medical evidence of record, and concluded that the applicant suffered from schizophrenia, disorganized, severe.  The PEB further concluded that there was sufficient evidence to substantiate that the applicant’s condition existed prior to service (EPTS), and was not aggravated by military service, but was the result of natural progression. The PEB found the applicant physically unfit for military service and not entitled to separation benefits.  

On 22 May 1991 the applicant concurred with the PEB’s findings and recommendations and waived a formal hearing of his case.

On 24 May 1991 the MEB provided the PEB a medical addendum and requested that the PEB reconsider its EPTS finding because it was clear to the MEB diagnostically that the applicant was in the prodrome of his illness at the time of initial administrative separation.  If at that time the applicant had been brought to psychiatric attention he would have been diagnosed as schizophreniform.  Schizophrenia includes a well described set of specific prodromal symptoms such as marked social isolation, impairment in occupational functioning, lack of initiative and interests, blunted affect, and perceptual experiences that are not formal hallucinations.  In the applicant’s case these symptoms are felt to have precipitated the deterioration in military fitness that was perceived administratively as characterologic rather than representative of his thought disorder.  Because he was not evaluated medically at that time the opportunity for diagnosing was lost until the subsequent further deterioration of his thought processes became manifest as an obvious psychosis.

On 28 June 1991 the PEB found that the MEB’s medical addendum did not provide any new substantive medical evidence, therefore, the PEB affirmed its decision that the applicant was unfit and recommendation of separation without benefits for an EPTS condition that was not permanently aggravated by military service.

On 10 July 1991 the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) approved the PEB and directed that the applicant be immediately discharged from the reserve of the Army under provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 4-24b(4).  Severance pay was not authorized and the discharge was to be effective no later than 17 July 1991.  Due to unknown reasons the applicant was not discharged on or before 17 July 1991.  PERSCOM issued another message directing that the applicant be discharged no later than 6 September 1991.

Accordingly, on 5 September 1991, the applicant was honorably discharged in the rank of PFC.  He completed 4 years, 7 months and 7 days of inactive service, and 1 year, 2 months and 17 days of creditable active service.

Army Regulation 635-40 sets forth the basic authority for the evaluation of physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability.  Paragraph 4-24b(4) provides for separation for physical disability without severance pay.

Army Regulation 601-210 prescribes eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the 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 codes.

RE-3 applies to persons who do not meet basic reentry criteria at time of separation.  The disqualification is waivable.  Individuals separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 4, for unfitness, are not eligible for enlistment without an approved waiver.

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.  The applicant’s administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 4, for physical unfitness was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  The RE code 3 reflects that he must have an approved waiver to reenter the Army; and therefore, it is correctly assigned in accordance with applicable regulations.

3.  The applicant’s contention that his RE code 3 was the result of harassment is not supported by the evidence of record, nor has he provided any substantiating evidence to support his allegation.

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

____X____  _____X___  ____X____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-12358	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.03	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.