MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            29 March 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000048671

	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	
	Ms. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols 		Member	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser 		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 his narrative reason for separation "personality disorder" be corrected to show that he was separated with a fully honorable discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he believes his record is in error because he was not suffering from a personality disorder at the time of his discharge.  His problem was temporary in nature.  Even though he has nothing at this time to support his contention, he is willing to get whatever is needed for the Board to make a determination in his favor.  His narrative reason for separation is making it extremely difficult to start a good career.  He submits a letter written in his own behalf in support of his request.  The letter states that when he joined the military his grandfather had recently passed away and he was still grieving.  Shortly after he joined the military, his grandmother had a stroke and he became overwhelmed when he was denied leave.  One night he drank a fifth of "Tiqulea," the next morning, he realized that he had cut his wrist with a shaver.  Because of this injury he was put on a "72 hour evaluation and a month later he was discharged." He has been sober for the past 3 years.  His goal in life is to become a police officer and the type of discharge that he received is the only thing standing in his way.

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

That on 4 November 1994, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Cannon Crewmember).  On 30 June 1995, he was assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina.  

On 1 August 1995, the applicant's unit commander counseled him due to his dysfunctional family background; his history of alcohol abuse; and serious marital problems.  The commander stated that the applicant was being referred for a psychiatric evaluation and that the results of the evaluation may be used to initiate separation actions for failure to adapt. 

On 2 August 1995, the battalion chaplain counseled the applicant due to extremely low morale; severe depression; and family and marital problems.  The applicant expressed suicidal thoughts and thoughts of going absent without leave.  The chaplain recommended that he be separated due to his inability to adapt to military life. 

On 12 August 1995, the applicant attempted suicide while he was impaired.
On 16 August 1995, a DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation) shows that the applicant was "hospitalized on inpatient psychiatry during the period 13-16 August 1995."  The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation by a professionally trained psychiatrist.  He was determined to meet the criteria for a personality disorder (borderline and dependent traits).  He was determined to be mentally responsible and he had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings.  Further, the examining official stated that an administrative separation was strongly recommended because the applicant would likely escalate the lethality of his suicide attempts.  Temporary duty/MOS reclassification was not likely to be successful.  The recommendation was to separate the applicant under the provisions of chapter 5, Army Regulation 635-200 for a personality disorder.  

On 16 August 1995, the applicant was counseled and command referred to the Alcohol Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program due to the fact that he was impaired when he attempted suicide.  On 24 August 1995, he refused a to take a physical examination.  

On 19 September 1995, the applicant’s unit commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him prior to the expiration of his term of service under the provisions of chapter 5, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of personality disorder with an HD.  His unit commander cited the basis for the recommendation was that the applicant's personality disorder was so severe that it impaired his ability to perform his duties and to effectively function in a military environment.  

On 19 September 1995, the applicant authenticated a statement with his initials and signature in which he stated that he had been afforded the opportunity to consult with legal counsel and that he did not desire further legal representation.  He was not entitled to a hearing by a board of officers and he declined the opportunity to submit a statement in his own behalf.  

On an unknown date, competent authority approved the recommendation and directed the issuance of an HD under the provisions of chapter 5, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of personality disorder.  

On 10 October 1995, he was separated with an HD, as a result of a personality disorder.  He completed 8 months and 10 days of active military service and he had no recorded lost time. 

On 25 October 2000, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request to change the narrative reason for separation.

Army Regulation 635-200, provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 provides that a soldier may be separated for a personality disorder, not amounting to disability under Army Regulation 635-40, that interferes with assignment to or performance of duty.  The regulation requires that the condition be a deeply ingrained, maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration that interferes with the soldier's ability to perform duty.  The regulation also directs that a commander will not take action prescribed in this chapter in lieu of disciplinary action, requires that the diagnosis conclude that 
the disorder is so severe that the soldier’s ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired, and states that a separation for a personality disorder is not appropriate when separation is warranted under other provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Army Regulation 604-10 or Army Regulation 635-40.  Army policy requires the award of a fully honorable discharge in such cases, unless the soldier is in an entry level status, or he or she has a general court-martial or more than one special court-martial.

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's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.

3.  The type of discharge directed and the narrative reason for separation is appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

4.  The Board noted that a physician trained in psychiatry evaluated and diagnosed the applicant as suffering from a personality disorder that impaired his ability to perform his duties.  The applicant has provided no probative evidence to the contrary.  Therefore, he has established no basis for changing the narrative reason for separation.

5.  The Board congratulates the applicant for his 3 years of sobriety and for setting employment goals.  However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

6.  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

__jns____  __le____  __cjp ____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000048671	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010329	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19951010	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 CH5  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	177.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.		

.  He also acknowledged that he understood the ramifications of receiving a GD.