ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD DATE: 11 April 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160013452 APPLICANT REQUESTS: Her under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for correction of Military Record Under The Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552) * five third-party character reference letters * medical advisory opinion FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states, in effect, there is no evidence of her having a personality disorder, there is only hearsay. The ones who say she has a personality disorder are the ones that did not care for her. They did not like her because she was athletic and never had an assigned job. She didn’t fully understand what happened until two years ago, when she applied for insurance. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army 31 December 1980. 4. A DA Form 2496 (Disposition Form), dated 3 August 1983, indicates the applicant had 49 documented clinic and emergency room visits in the preceding 12 month period. Additionally: * she freely admitted to abusing her health care privileges in an attempt to demonstrate her unhappiness with the U.S. Army; this did not mean she did not have a real illness * she had a diagnostic laparoscopy performed on 23 March 1983, confirmed chronic salpingitis, often leading to abdominal pain and infertility; this was the basis for most of her visits * her frequent clinic visits prevented her from performing adequately in her military occupational specialty (MOS) * she openly desired separation from the armed forces * she performed sub optimally in her MOS * she displayed an inability to adapt to active duty life 5. Summary Court-Martial Order Number 4, issued by Headquarters, 541st Maintenance Battalion, Fort Riley, Kansas on 22 August 1983, shows the applicant was convicted on 19 August 1983 of violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). She was convicted of disobeying a direct order, on or about 7 July 1983, and unlawfully striking another Soldier, on or about 11 July 1983. Her sentence included her reduction in rank and grade, and forfeiture of $150.00 pay per month for one month. 6. The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 7 September 1983. The evaluating provider diagnosed her with mixed personality disorder, manifested by passive-aggressive behavior, difficulty with authority, inability to cope with military responsibilities, and immaturity. She was hospitalized for thoughts of harming herself and complaints of psychotic feelings. Further hospitalization revealed no evidence of psychosis and suggested without clear proof, malingering. She had no mental disorder that warranted disposition through medical channels; in effect, she had a character disorder. 7. The applicant's commander notified the applicant on 15 September 1983 that she was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13. She acknowledged receipt of the notification memorandum and elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf. 8. The applicant's commander formally recommended her separation from service on 16 September 1983, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-13, by reason of a personality disorder. The separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 27 September 1983. 9. The applicant was discharged on 3 October 1983, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, by reason of a personality disorder. Her DD Form 214 confirms her service was characterized as under honorable conditions. 10. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was provided by the Army Review Boards Agency Senior Medical Advisor. This official opined that the applicant's diagnosis and basis for separation, a personality disorder, is substantiated based on the presence of pre-service characterological issues, review of in service disciplinary actions and medical records, and review of post-service medical records highlighting ongoing significant conduct issues. Furthermore, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) maintained a personality disorder diagnosis through multiple hospitalizations, which involve continuous observation and assessment. The advisory opinion further states the discharge was proper and equitable. 11. The medical advisory opinion was provided to the applicant on 11 February 2019, to allow her the opportunity to submit additional comments or a rebuttal. She did not respond. 12. The applicant provides five third-party character reference letters that state: * she demonstrates good will toward others * she volunteers her time and resources in the community * she is enthusiastic about everything she does * she assists other through ministry * she is disciplined and reliable * she is compassionate * she is very involved in the church and she helps fellow Veterans * she has worked through her depression and life difficulties 13. The Board should consider the applicant's statement in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to grant relief. The applicant’s contentions, medical concerns, letters of support, and the medical advisory were carefully considered. The medical advisory official determined there were no mitigating factors to her misconduct and subsequent separation. She was provided the opportunity to rebut the advisory; however, she did not respond. The Board applied Department of Defense standards of liberal consideration to the complete evidentiary record and did not find any evidence of error, injustice, or inequity. The Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization was warranted as a result of the misconduct. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : X :X :X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): Not Applicable REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 provides for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. b. Paragraph 5-5 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member being separated under Chapter 5 would be awarded a character of service of honorable, under honorable conditions or an entry level of separation. No member would be awarded a character of service of under honorable conditions unless the member was notified of the specific factors in his or her service record that warranted such a characterization, using the notification procedures. c. Paragraph 5-13 provides the criteria for discharge because of a personality disorder. It provides that a Soldier may be separated for personality disorders, not amounting to disability under Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), which interfere with assignment to or performance of duty. The diagnosis of a personality disorder must be established by a physician trained in psychiatry and psychiatric diagnosis. Separation because of a 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. 3. The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records on 25 July 2018, regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial forum. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, Boards shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160013452 6 1