PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           28 August 2001                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001058939

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, item 28 be changed to read Major Depressive Disorder, that item 18 be corrected to show he arrived in Southwest Asia four weeks earlier and departed four weeks later, that he be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal, and that any other awards which he should have received be added to his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant states that due to extensive medical evidence from Eisenhower Army Hospital and currently from his VA medical records, he had a history of Major Depressive Disorder, not Personality Disorder.  He earned the Army Good Conduct Medal.  He served with honor and commitment and reenlisted before he was medically discharged.  He arrived in Southwest Asia with the advance party four weeks ahead of the rest of his unit and stayed four weeks later to train the new unit that was replacing them.  He provides his DD Form 214 as supporting evidence.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 August 1996.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 82C (Field Artillery Surveyor).

5.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that he served in Southwest Asia from    1 September 1997 – 1 February 1998.  His Enlisted Qualification Record,         DA Form 2-1, shows that he served in Southwest Asia from 1 September      1997 – 1 February 1998.  The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) stated that their records show he received foreign duty pay from 2 September 1997 – 4 February 1998.

6.  The applicant was hospitalized from 6 February to 1 March 1999 during which time a psychiatric evaluation was conducted.  He had been readmitted to inpatient psychiatry for emotional distress over difficulty locating a unit to separate him from the military.  He was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct and Personality Disorder, not otherwise specified.  It was recommended he be administratively separated as expeditiously as possible.  

7.  On 13 March 1999, the applicant completed a separation physical examination and was found qualified for separation.  The Report of Medical History, SF 93, notes that he had been treated for depression and personality disorder.

8.  On an unknown date, the applicant’s commander initiated separation action on the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph    5-13, personality disorder.  On 24 May 1999, the applicant acknowledged notification of the action.  On 25 May 1999, he declined the opportunity to consult with counsel and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation. 

9.  On 11 June 1999, the applicant was discharged, with an honorable characterization of service, in pay grade E-4, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, personality disorder.  He had completed    2 years, 9 months, and 14 days of creditable active service with no lost time.  His DD Form 214 lists his awards as the Army Commendation Medal, the Army Achievement Medal (4th award), the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and the Parachutist Badge.

10.  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.   

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  It provides that the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  This period is for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The narrative reason for his discharge appears to be correct.  The evidence of record shows that he was examined by competent military medical (psychiatric) authorities and diagnosed with Personality Disorder.

2.  There appears to be an error in item 18 of the applicant’s DD Form 214 concerning the period of his service in Southwest Asia.  However, he contends that he arrived in Southwest Asia four weeks earlier and departed four weeks later than as noted on his DD Form 214.  DFAS records show that he arrived one day later and departed three days later than as indicated on his DD Form 214.  Since the applicant provides no evidence to support his contention, the Board will not correct the period to coincide with DFAS’s information unless he specifically requests it in a new application.

3.  It appears the applicant met the eligibility criteria for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  He had no record of disciplinary action, he had been awarded four personal decorations during his period of service, he received an honorable characterization of service upon his discharge, and there is no evidence that he was considered for but disqualified for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  It would have been his first award and he served for more than one year.  It would be appropriate to show that he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal.

4.  Other than the Army Good Conduct Medal, however, it appears that the applicant was awarded all the awards and decorations to which he was entitled.

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the applicant the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 28 August 1996 – 11 June 1999.

2.  That the applicant’s DD Form 214 be amended to add the Army Good Conduct Medal.

3.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__jns___  __rtd___  __dph___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			John N. Slone
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058939	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010828	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0056	
2.	110.02	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.