MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           14 March 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065657

	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	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		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 uncharacterized discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was told that his uncharacterized discharge would not affect his ability to find a job.  He further states that an upgrade of his uncharacterized discharge would enhance his employment opportunities.

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

On 22 February 1984, the applicant enlisted in the Army for a period of 3 years for training in military occupation specialty (MOS) 75B (Personnel Administration Specialist).

On 1 March 1984, the applicant began basic combat training at Fort Knox, Kentucky.  On 9 March 1984, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for one specification of disobeying the lawful order of a commissioned officer and three specifications of disobeying the lawful order of a noncommissioned officer.  He was also counseled on refusal to obey orders, leaving the training area without permission, and refusing to attend training. 

On 7 March 1984, the applicant’s unit commander referred him for a mental status evaluation.  The psychiatrist conducting this evaluation diagnosed the applicant with a mixed personality disorder with impulsive, immature and inadequate features.  The psychiatrist further recommended that the applicant be administratively separated from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-13. 

On 15 March 1984, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5-13, based on his personality disorder.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation action and completed his election of rights by waiving his right to personal appearance and consideration of his case by a board of officers and to military counsel.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 22 March 1984, the appropriate authority approved the separation action and directed the applicant receive an uncharacterized discharge based on his personality disorder.  On 27 March 1984, the applicant was discharged accordingly after completing a total of 1 month and 6 days of active military service.  

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 3, paragraph 3-9, identifies service characterizations and outlines the applicable circumstances that authorize each type of characterization.  It states, in pertinent part, that the purpose of the entry level status (ELS) is to provide soldiers a probationary period during which they may be separated with an uncharacterized separation when they have served for less than 180 days at the time a commander initiates separation action, if they are not being separated for misconduct.  This is not an adverse separation action and denotes only that the individual had less than 180 days on active duty.

Paragraph 5-13 of the regulation provides the policy and procedure for the separation of soldiers by reason of personality disorder.  It states, in pertinent part, that a soldier may be separated for a personality disorder that interferes with assignment to or performance of duty, when so diagnosed by a physician trained in psychiatry or psychiatric diagnosis.  It further stipulates that the service of a soldier separated for this reason will be characterized as honorable unless he is an ELS, in which case, it will be uncharacterized.  

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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that his uncharacterized discharge impairs his ability to gain employment, but it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.  The evidence of record confirms that his separation was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations and his uncharacterized separation accurately reflects his limited period of active duty service and overall record of service.

2.  The record clearly establishes that the applicant was in an ELS and had completed less than 180 days of active military service at the time the separation action was initiated against him by his unit commander.  By regulation, an uncharacterized separation is mandated for members separated while still in an ELS, an honorable discharge may only be granted in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty.  The Board finds no such special circumstances in this case; thus, it concludes that an upgrade to his discharge is not warranted. 

3.  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.

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

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065657	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/03/14	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19840327	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, Paragraph 13.  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON	Personality Disorder	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.