APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That the reason for his discharge be changed to expeditious or expiration term of service (ETS) and that his reentry eligibility code be changed to either “1” or “2.”

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that at no time did the supposed personality disorder ever affect the performance of his duties.  The discharge summary from the hospital states he was fit for duty and had no limitations on his activities.

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

He was born on 4 June 1965.  He initially enlisted on 13 September 1983.  He was relieved from active duty for entry level status performance and conduct on 19 January 1984..  On 15 February 1989, he reenlisted and had continuous service until his discharge.

On 1 April 1994, the applicant turned himself in for treatment of a severely depressed mood and homicidal ideation towards his wife, who had filed for divorce.  He had reported a history of multiple violent outbursts in the past, stating that once he gets in a state of rage he could not control himself, and seeing his wife around Schofield Barracks, HI, would cause him to lose control and injure or kill her.  He was put on medication for explosiveness control.  The attending physician recommended that he be administratively separated if he could not be very expeditiously reassigned.  He was discharged back to duty on 12 April 1994 in a stable condition with instructions to arrange a follow-up mental status exam, to take his medication, and to avoid his wife.

On 26 April 1994, a mental status exam found the applicant to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in any board proceedings and to be mentally responsible.  It also diagnosed him with a personality disorder, not otherwise specified.  Problems presented by him were not amenable to hospitalization, brief treatment, a rehabilitative transfer, disciplinary action or retraining.  It was unlikely that any rehabilitation measures would produce an effective service member of him.  His present maladjustment to military service reflected a life-long pattern of recurrent and immature behavior as well as an inability to relate effectively to others.  Further, retention of him would likely create additional management problems.  Administrative separation was recommended.

On 30 April 1994, the applicant’s commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-31, Personality Disorder.

On 30 April 1994, the applicant acknowledged notification of the action and  waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and waived personal appearance before such a board.  No statements in his own behalf were submitted.

On 2 May 1994, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation. 

On 24 May 1994, the applicant was discharged in the pay grade of E-5 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-31, personality disorder.  He received a reentry code of “3.”  He had completed 5 years, 7 months and          17 days of creditable active service with no lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5, paragraph 5-31, 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.   

Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army  (RA) and the U.S. Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.  RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waiverable.  

Recruiting personnel have the responsibility for initially determining whether an individual meets current enlistment criteria.  They are required to process a request for waiver under the provisions of Chapter 4, Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program.  Therefore, since enlistment criteria does change, and since an individual has the right to apply for a waiver, the applicant should periodically visit his local recruiting station to determine if he should apply for a waiver.

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 applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  He had a right to request consideration of his case by board of officers and to personally appear before that board, but he waived that right.

3.  There is no basis for removal of the RE code from the applicant’s record.  The disqualification upon which the code was based, however, can be waived for reenlistment purposes.  

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

                       DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director