MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           12 April 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999034552

	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.

	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. James P. Stueve		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 changed.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he is looking for a new job but the reason for separation makes it look like he will not adjust to anything in life.

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

He was inducted into the Army on 19 July 1967 after completing 2 years of dental technician school.  He completed basic training but apparently did not complete advanced individual training as a cook.  His first assignment was at Fort Lee, VA with the U. S. Army Dental Detachment as a dental removable prosthetic specialist.  Three weeks later he was reassigned to perform duties as a cook.

On 7 February 1968, after the applicant referred himself to Mental Hygiene Consultation for evaluation, he was diagnosed as a passive-aggressive personality, passive-dependent type.  The diagnosis represented a character and behavior disorder.

On 29 February 1968, the company commander initiated separation action under Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability due to the applicant’s inaptitude, lack of general adaptability, unhandiness, inability to learn, lack of appropriate interest and inability to expend effort constructively.  He was advised of his rights by counsel.  He waived his right to consideration of his case by a board of officers; waived personal appearance before a board; and waived representation by counsel.  He made a statement wherein he requested he receive an honorable discharge. 

On 6 March 1968, the appropriate authority approved the request and directed issuance of a General Discharge Certificate and the applicant was accordingly discharged under honorable conditions on 12 March 1968 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, for unsuitability.

On 1 July 1980, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) upgraded the applicant’s characterization of service to fully honorable.

Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  The regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members were subject to separation for unsuitability for inaptitude, character and behavior disorders, apathy (lack of appropriate interest), defective attitudes, 

and inability to expend effort constructively, alcoholism, and enuresis.  A general under honorable conditions characterization of service was normally appropriate.

Army Regulation 635-200 superseded Army Regulation 635-212.  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.  An honorable characterization of service is normally appropriate.  The narrative reason for a soldier separated under this authority is Personality Disorder.

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 the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with regulations applicable at the time with the appropriate characterization of service.  The narrative reason for separation was appropriate given the commander’s description of his service.  The Board notes that, considering the psychiatric report, Character and Behavior Disorder would also have been appropriate.

3.  The character of service is separate from the narrative reason for separation and the ADRB’s upgrade of his character of service in 1980 did not require a corresponding change in the narrative reason for his separation.

4.  Considering the applicant’s psychiatric diagnosis, under current standards he would be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13 and given a narrative reason for separation of Personality Disorder.  However, the applicant has not requested this change and may consider such a reason to also be a hindrance in his job hunt.  The Board will not make such a change without his consent.

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

__rgh___  __bje___  __jps___  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999034552	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000412	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.