MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           8 June 2000                            
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000039333

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Judy Blanchard-Miller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		Member	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		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:  In effect, that her reason for discharge be changed to disability.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that her separation for “personality disorder” was in error since she was never diagnosed with the disorder.  She further states that she was suffering from a major depressive disorder, as her current disability rating of 30 percent indicates.  As supporting evidence she submits a copy of her rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

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

She enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 August 1996.  She completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 98G (Voice Interceptor Specialist).  The highest grade she achieved was pay grade E-2.

On 19 May 1997, the applicant was evaluated by a competent medical doctor trained in the field of psychiatry.  The particulars surrounding her evaluation are missing from her file.  However, she was psychiatrically cleared for administrative action deemed appropriate.

On 4 June 1997, the applicant completed a separation physical examination and was found qualified for separation.

On 8 July 1997, the applicant’s commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13, for (personality disorder).

On 14 July 1997, the applicant consulted with counsel and acknowledged notification of the action.  She elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf. 

On 18 August 1997, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be discharged with an Honorable Discharge Certificate. 

On 2 September 1997, the applicant was discharged, with an honorable characterization of service, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-13, for (personality disorder).  She had completed
1 year and 18 days of creditable active service with no lost time.

Sometime after the applicant was discharged, the VA awarded the applicant a disability rating of 10 percent for a depressive condition.  On 1 November 1999, the VA increased her disability rating to 30 percent.

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 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability.  The regulation defines “physically unfit” as unfitness due to physical disability.  The unfitness is of such a degree that a soldier is unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating in such a way as to reasonably fulfill the purpose of his employment on active duty. 

Army Regulation 40-501 governs medical fitness standards for enlistment, retention and separation.  Paragraph 3-35 states that a personality disorder may render an individual administratively unfit rather than unfit because of physical disability.  Interference with performance of effective duty in association with these conditions will be dealt with through appropriate administrative channels. 

Title 38, U. S. Code, sections 310 and 331, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service.  The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned.  Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual’s medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency.

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 this requirement.

2.  The applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder.  By regulation, interference with performance of effective duty in association with these conditions will be dealt with through appropriate administrative channels. 

3.  The award of VA compensation does not mandate disability retirement or separation from the Army.  The fact that the VA, in its discretion, has awarded the applicant a disability rating is a prerogative exercised within the policies of that agency.  It does not, in itself, establish physical unfitness for Department of the Army purposes.

4.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize her rights. 

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

__slp___  __lem___  __aao___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000039333	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000608	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19970902	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, 5-13	
DISCHARGE REASON	A42.00	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.4200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.