MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           20 January 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999019649

	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.

	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Mr. Gary F. Geraets		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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 her uncharacterized discharge be changed to honorable and, in effect, that her military records be corrected to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment. 

APPLICANT STATES:  That after 3 weeks in basic training she realized she did not have the maturity to complete training and further military service.  She was not aware she could request a discharge based on the failure to adjust to military life so she sought a medical discharge.  She arranged to go to the community mental health service where she proceeded to relate several problems she was experiencing.  Some of the problems were legitimate and some were not.  The counselor diagnosed her with a borderline personality disorder and recommended her discharge.  Since then she has matured and set her life straight and she believes she can become a productive member of the U. S. Air Force.  She provides three letters of support, one letter of explanation addressed to the local Office of Veterans Affairs office, and a letter from a clinical psychologist as supporting evidence.

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

She enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 November 1992.

On 20 November 1992, the applicant was diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder by the Community Mental Health Service.

On 25 November 1992, the applicant’s commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13, Personality Disorder.

On 25 November 1992, the applicant consulted with counsel and acknowledged notification of the action.  She elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf.  She stated in writing that she did not desire a separation medical examination.

On 2 December 1992, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be discharged with an uncharacterized entry-level separation. 

On 9 December 1992, the applicant was discharged, with an uncharacterized characterization of service, in pay grade E-1 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13, personality disorder.  She had completed       1 month and 6 days of creditable active service with no lost time.  She received a reentry code of 3.

A 22 July 1998 letter from a clinical psychologist states that at the time of the applicant’s Army psychiatric interview she deceived her interviewers.  It was her way to negatively manipulate a discharge from the Army.  She was highly immature and impulsive and did not have many healthy ways to manage her stressful feelings other than through deception of others.  Since her discharge she has attained positive personal goals and is physically and psychologically healthier than she was in 1992.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5, paragraph 5-13, 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.   

Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11 sets the policy and prescribes procedures for separating members who were voluntarily enlisted in the Regular Army, are in an entry level status and, before the date of the initiation of separation action, have completed no more than 180 days of creditable continuous service and have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention.  An illustration of conduct that does not qualify for retention is:  cannot or will not adapt socially or emotionally to military life.  An uncharacterized description of service is required for soldiers in an entry-level status.

Army Regulation 635-200 also provides that an uncharacterized separation will be given to soldiers in an entry-level status (for Regular Army soldiers, the first 180 days of continuous active duty) except under unusual circumstances.

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. 

On 11 December 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for a change in the characterization of 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.  The applicant has provided no evidence to show that at the time of her discharge in 1992 she did not have a personality disorder.  The Board concludes that the letter from the clinical psychologist provided by her may show that she currently does not have a personality disorder but that does not invalidate the determination made 7 years prior at the time of her separation.

3.  In addition, the reason for discharge the applicant was thinking of – chapter 11, entry level status, failure to adapt to military life – would also have provided her with an uncharacterized description of service.

4.  The reentry code of 3 the applicant was given was and still is appropriate.  However, it is a waiverable disqualification.  The applicant’s concern appears to be the ability to enlist in the U. S. Air Force.  Since the U. S. Air Force has enlistment requirements similar to, though not exactly the same as, the U. S. Army she should apply to Air Force recruiting personnel for a waiver of her disqualification. 

5.  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

__rgh___  __gfg___  __bje___  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999019649	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000120	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UNCHAR	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19921209	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Ch 5-13 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A93.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.03	
2.	110.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.