MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:           5 June 2003 
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002079532

	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. Antoinette Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file.

	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 general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions be changed to a medical discharge.
 
APPLICANT STATES:  In essence, he requests that his military records be reviewed and that serious consideration be given to the matter of his discharge.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 28 October 1986.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman) while stationed at Fort Benning, Georgia.  

On 20 February 1987, he was reassigned to basic airborne training, which he completed.  

On 23 March 1987, he was transferred to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, for duty in his MOS.  

On 26 May 1987, he listed as being absent without leave (AWOL) for one day.  

On 28 May 1987, the applicant received a counseling statement which showed that he ignored orders given by a noncommissioned officer (NCO) to report to his assigned place of duty from 23 to 27 May 1987.

On 29 May 1987, he received non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for disobeying an order given by a NCO on the same day.  His punishment included reduction to E-1, restriction and extra duty for 14 days.  His appeal was denied.  

On 26 June 1987, the applicant was issued a permanent physical profile, which specifically prohibited parachute jumping.   He also underwent a psychiatric evaluation.  He was diagnosed as having a mixed personality disorder, manifested with features of immaturity, poor impulse control, a history of injuring self and others during fights and trouble with authority figures.  He was also diagnosed as experiencing Post Head Trauma Concussion Syndrome, resolving but probably aggravating the above.  The doctor also recommended that the applicant be administratively transferred to a non-combat job and that he be administratively separated from the service, if deemed appropriate by his chain of command.  

On 1 July 1987 a medical examination found him to be qualified for separation with a physical profile of T3.1.1.1.1.1.  

On the same day a mental status evaluation was completed, which showed that the applicant's behavior was normal.  He was fully alert and oriented and displayed an unremarkable mood.  His thinking was clear, his thought content normal and his memory good.  There was no significant mental illness.  The applicant was mentally responsible.  He was able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right.

On 25 August 1987, the applicant’s unit commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13-2a for unsatisfactory performance.  He cited the applicant’s inability to develop sufficiently, to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.  The applicant was advised of his rights, he consulted with legal counsel, and was informed of the impact of a less than fully honorable discharge.  He was also afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf, but he declined to do so.  

On 26 August 1987, the appropriate authority approved the separation recommendation, waived further rehabilitative action and directed the issuance of a GD.

On 11 September 1987, the applicant was separated with a GD, under honorable conditions, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13-2a, for unsatisfactory performance.  He completed 9 months and 
16 days of creditable active service and he had 28 days of lost time.  

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier. 

Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 7, physical profiling, provides that the basic purpose of the physical profile serial system is to provide an index to the overall functional capacity of an individual and is used to assist the unit commander and personnel officer in their determination of what duty assignments the individual is capable of performing, and if reclassification action is warranted.  Four numerical designations (1-4) are used to reflect different levels of functional capacity in six factors: P-physical capacity or stamina, U-upper extremities, L-lower extremities, H-hearing and ears, E-eyes, and S-psychiatric.  Numerical designator "1" under all factors indicates that an individual is considered to possess a high level of medical fitness and, consequently, is medically fit for any military assignment.  
Numerical designators "2" and "3" indicate that an individual has a medical condition or physical defect which requires certain restrictions in assignment within which the individual is physically capable of performing military duty.  

The individual should receive assignments commensurate with his or her functional capacity.  Numerical designator "4" indicates that an individual has one or more medical conditions or physical defects of such severity that performance of military duty must be drastically limited.  Even the numerical designator "4" does not necessarily mean that the individual is unfit because of physical disability as defined in Army Regulation 635-40.  To make a profile serial more informative, two modifiers are used: "P" (permanent) and "T" (temporary).  The "T" modifier indicates that the condition necessitating a numerical designator "3" or "4" is considered temporary, the correction or treatment of the condition is medically advisable, and correction will usually result in a higher physical capacity.  In no case will individuals in military status carry a "T" modifier for more than 12 months without positive action being taken either to correct the defect or to effect other appropriate disposition.

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

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 applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  

2.  The evidence of record indicates that as of 1 July 1987, the applicant received a mental status evaluation and a medical examination, which assigned him a physical profile of T3.1.1.1.1.1, for a temporary medical condition.  Regardless of his temporary medical status, the evaluations found that the applicant was mentally and physically fit for separation.  Additionally, there is no available evidence provided by the applicant or indicated in his record that would suggest that a medical discharge was appropriate.

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

AAO          TBR            KAH          DENY APPLICATION

Carl W. S. Chun
Director, Army Boards for Correction
of military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002079532	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	2003.06.05	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1987.09.11	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 Ch 13-2a	
DISCHARGE REASON	Unsatisfactory performance	
BOARD DECISION	DENY 	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	A110.02	
2.	A40.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.