MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:             13 June 2000                 
	DOCKET NUMBER:     AR1999032277

	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. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Elizabeth Buchannon		Chairperson	
	Mr. John H. Kern		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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 his discharge due to personality disorder be corrected to a medical discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he is dying of cancer and not working.  Correcting the reason for his discharge to medical would be the right thing to do.  He continues that he was under a great deal of pressure when discharge action was brought against him.  He had gone through two divorces in one year and lost his son, but his supervisor “would not give him a break.”  He was suffering from bipolar Manic Depression, but was improperly treated for personality disorder, an error which resulted in his erroneous non-disability discharge.  Since his discharge he has been in treatment and has now been diagnosed as having lymphoma.

In support of his application he submits his civilian resume which shows that since his discharge he has attended two colleges with a 3.0 and 3.8 grade point average, respectively; he has completed four medical courses; and he has worked continuously in his field of radiology.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 October 1985, was awarded the military occupational specialties of medical specialist and x-ray specialist, and was promoted to pay grade E-5.

On 2 September 1991 the applicant was hospitalized for attempted suicide and was kept as an inpatient until 19 September 1991.  

On 21 October 1991 the applicant was counseled for getting into a verbal confrontation with a patient about a parking place.

On 20 November 1991 he was again hospitalized for suicidal ideation.  He had stated that he was a danger to himself.  During that hospitalization he reported having occupational and marital problems, having divorced both of his wives.  He also reported that his second wife lost their child during pregnancy in 1990.  In the physician’s summary it was stated that after his admission to the psychiatric ward he “reconstituted quickly.  He actively participated in group therapy, occupational therapy and in the milieu.”  His discharge diagnosis was adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features, and occupational and marital problems.

On 26 November 1991 the applicant was counseled for failing to go to his appointed place of duty on both 18 and 19 November 1991.

On 24 July 1992 the applicant was counseled for improper use of e-mail for using widespread e-mail delivery to show discontent with his superiors and to spread his negative personal views.
On 9 October 1992 the applicant was again hospitalized for attempted suicide.  A report of mental status evaluation conducted at that time resulted in a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder manifested by a pattern of intense and quick anger, unstable relationships (especially in the work area), impulsivity and self-destructive tendencies.  The psychiatrist making that assessment stated that he had been treating the applicant since July 1991.

The applicant’s commander then notified him of his intent to recommend his discharge due to personality disorder and of his rights in conjunction with that recommendation.  The applicant waived his rights.

The applicant’s commander’s recommendation was approved and he was honorably discharged on 22 December 1992 by reason of personality disorder.

Army Regulation 40-501, paragraph 3-35, personality, sexual or factitious disorders; disorders of impulse control not elsewhere classified, and psychoactive 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.

Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, provides for the separation of enlisted soldiers for personality disorders when the condition is deeply-ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration that interferes with the soldier’s ability to perform duty.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant was found to exhibit a personality disorder which rendered him administratively unfit for continued service.  He was never determined medically disqualified.  Without a medical disqualification there was no basis to refer him to a physical evaluation board for consideration of a medical separation.

2.  The applicant has not submitted any evidence or argument, which would show that an improper diagnosis was made of his personality disorder.

3.  The applicant’s post-service resume is indicative of an individual who is physically and mentally sound, which further supports the presumption of his medical fitness.

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

____eb__  __jhk  ___  ___be___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999032277	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000613	
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.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.