MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           23 MAY 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002068160

	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. Gale J. Thomas		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Mark D. Mannning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		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, disability retirement or separation.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was diagnosed with fallen arches due to bilateral pes planus from wearing Army boots, and that he had a passive aggressive personality disorder, both of which were incurred or aggravated during active military service.  In support of his request the applicant submits copies of his medical records 

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

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 August 1979 for a period of 
3 years.  He completed basic training at Fort Jackson and advanced individual training at Fort Gordon, Georgia.

On 11 February 1981, a Mental Status Evaluation diagnosed the applicant with a passive aggressive personality.  The examining psychiatrist states that the applicant had repeated medical and surgical clinic visits for various complaints, none of which had a discernible organic basis.  He noted his prognosis for any rehabilitative measures was very poor, that his distorted pleas for help were
self-defeating and alienating, that he showed little potential for retention in the service, and gave much evidence that his inability to adapt would continue.  He recommended administrative separation from the service. 

On 20 April 1981, the applicant acknowledged notification by his commander that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31 (Expeditious Discharge Program).  The applicant voluntarily consented to the discharge, and declined the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf. 

On 20 May 1981, a physical examination cleared the applicant for separation.
The examining physician noted his passive-aggressive personality and his flat feet.

On 10 June 1981, his commander requested that he be discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5.  The reasons for his request was the applicant’s inability to adapt to the military environment, his constant malingering, and using that as a means to remove himself from his work area and details.

On 15 June 1981, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge under the above cited regulation and directed the issuance of an honorable discharge certificate.

On 8 July 1981, he was discharged in pay grade E-3, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge form Active Duty) indicates he had 1 year, 10 months and 18 days of active military service.

Army Regulation 40-501 states that personality disorders 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.  It also states that transient, situational maladjustment due to acute or special stress does not render an individual unfit because of physical disability, but rather may be the basis for administrative separation if recurrent and causing interference with military duty.

Army Regulation 635-40, then in effect, states that disability compensation is not an entitlement acquired by reason of service-incurred illness or injury; rather, it is provided to soldiers whose service is interrupted and they can no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability incurred or aggravated in service.  When a solider is being processed for separation or retirement for reasons other than physical disability, continued performance of assigned duty commensurate with his or her rank or grade until the soldier is scheduled for separation or retirement, creates a presumption that the soldier is fit.  The presumption of fitness may be overcome if the evidence establishes that the soldier was, in fact, physically unable to perform adequately the duties of his or her office, grade, rank or rating for a period of time because of disability.  There must be a causative relationship between the less than adequate duty performance and the unfitting medical condition or conditions.  The presumption of fitness may also be overcome by an acute, grave illness or injury or other significant deterioration of the soldier’s physical condition occurred immediately prior to, or coincident with processing for separation or retirement for reasons other than physical disability and which rendered the soldier unfit for further duty. 

Army Regulation 635-200 provides the policy and sets forth the procedure for administrative separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5, as then in effect, provided, in pertinent part, for the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP).  This program provided that an individual who had completed at least 6 months, but less than 36 months of active duty and who demonstrated (by poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally or failure to demonstrate promotion potential) that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards could be separated.  Such personnel were issued a general or honorable discharge, as appropriate, except that a recommendation for a general discharge had to be initiated by the immediate commander and the individual had to consult with legal counsel.  

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 evidence of record indicates that the applicant did not have any medically
unfitting disability which required physical disability processing.  Therefore, there is no basis for physical disability retirement or separation.

2.  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 to show that there was an error or injustice in this case.

3.  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

__MDM _  __LE____  __KYF___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002068160	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020523	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	108.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.