MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            7 August 2003 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003087242

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern		Member	
	Ms. Mae M. Bullock		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:  That the narrative reason for his separation be removed from his report of separation (DD Form 214) and that he be given a more favorable reentry (RE) code that will allow him to join the National Guard or Reserve.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his narrative reason for separation and RE Code unjustly prevents him from joining the Reserve Components and hinders his ability to obtain decent employment.  He goes on to state that he should never have been discharged and that he does not have a personality disorder.  He also states that his troubles started after he had to leave his wife in Germany to have their child, because she could not travel at the time.  He continues by stating that he made numerous attempts to get stationed back in Germany and to take leave to visit his family.  However, his first sergeant did not like him and kept denying his leave.  He also states that he lost his wife and has not seen his son since he was 2 weeks old.  He has since had a daughter in 1995 and a set of twins in 1996.  However, their mother has since gone and he has raised the three children on his own, while only being able to earn minimum wage.  He is actively involved with his children and the community and contends that his records will show him as a responsible and hard working soldier.  Unfortunately, his first sergeant did not like him and endeavored to make his life miserable.  He further states that he has endeavored to improve his education and skills and would like the chance to further succeed without the stigma of a personality disorder on his DD Form 214.  In support of his application he submits copies of his military and civilian school completion certificates as well as his awards and commendations.            
EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 January 1981 for training as a cavalry scout and assignment to Europe.  He completed his training and was transferred to Germany on 7 May 1981.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 2 September 1982.

On 11 May 1984, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty, for operating a vehicle while drunk and for operating a vehicle in a reckless manner causing an accident and damage to property.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-3, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.

He was again advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 15 September 1984 and was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 11 September 1985.  He departed Germany on 2 October 1985 and was transferred to Fort Knox, Kentucky.

On 17 October 1986, NJP was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty and for dereliction of duty.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.
Although the record of NJP (DA Form 2627) is not present in the available records, they show that NJP was imposed against him on 17 November 1986.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-4, a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction.

On 17 December 1986, the commander initiated a recommendation to bar the applicant from reenlistment.  He cited the applicant's disciplinary record, his uttering eight bad checks, his failure to respond to numerous counseling sessions for missing appointments, failure to go to his place of duty, poor performance, poor attitude and appearance, disobeying orders and his unwillingness to heed any guidance given as the basis for his recommendation.

The applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and the bar was approved by the appropriate authority on 18 December 1986.

Although the reason is not indicated, the applicant was apprehended by civil authorities and confined on 11 February 1987 for a period of 1 day.

On 13 March 1987, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of two specifications of failure to go to his place of duty, two specifications of disobeying lawful orders from senior noncommissioned officers and two specifications of breaking restriction.  He was sentenced to confinement for 30 days and reduction to the pay grade of E-1.

The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 8 May 1987 and was diagnosed with an avoidant-dependant mixed personality disorder with antisocial features.  The examining psychiatrist found him capable of distinguishing right from wrong and adhering to the right and recommended that he not be retained in the service.  He further indicated that his condition was of such a degree as to seriously impair his function in the military service.

On 13 May 1987, the applicant's commander initiated a recommendation to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, due to a personality disorder.  He cited the applicant's psychiatric evaluation, his continued desire to be separated from the service, and his lack of motivation as the basis for his recommendation.  After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his rights and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 22 May 1987 and directed that the applicant be furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 29 May 1987, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, due to a personality disorder.  He had served 6 years, 7 months and 3 days of total active service and had 22 days of lost time.  He was issued RE Codes of 3B, 3C and 3.

There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board to have the reason for his discharge changed within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13 provides the criteria for discharge because of a personality disorder.  It states, in pertinent that a soldier may be separated for personality disorders that interfere with assignment to or performance of duty.  The diagnosis of personality disorder must have been established by a physician trained in Psychiatry and psychiatric diagnosis.  Separation because of personality disorder is authorized only if the diagnosis concludes that the disorder is so severe that the soldier’s ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired.

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 discharge was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

3.  The Board has noted the applicant's contentions and supporting documents; however, the evidence of record at the time clearly shows that he was diagnosed at the time by the appropriate medical personnel (psychiatrist) as having a personality disorder and he has failed to show that such was not the case.

4.  The Board commends the applicant for his post-service accomplishments and desire to serve; however, given the circumstances in this case, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant changing his narrative reason for separation or RE Code.

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

___mb __  ___tbr___  ___ao___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087242	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2003/08/07	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  191	110.0200/rsn/auth	
2.  4	100.0300/re code	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.