BOARD DATE: 12 July 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100029165 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests her honorable discharge be changed to a medical discharge. 2. The applicant states: * she wants her honorable discharge corrected to show a medical discharge because she is a 100-percent disabled veteran * she was discharged due to medical reasons and has since been awarded full disability through the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) * since her discharge in 2002 she has been determined to have a permanent disability that will not allow her to work * she has applied for her Post-9/11 GI Bill chapter 33 education benefits and was denied 3. The applicant provides: * VA letters, dated 3 September 2010 and 15 March 2010 * DD From 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * VA Rating Decision, dated 8 March 2010 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. She enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 August 1999 for a period of 4 years. She completed her training and was awarded military occupational specialty 51B (carpenter and masonry specialist). 3. On 8 January 2002, she underwent a mental status evaluation and was diagnosed by a doctoral-level psychologist as having a personality disorder with dependent personality traits. 4. Discharge proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 5-13, for a personality disorder were initiated on 22 March 2002. The applicant consulted with counsel, waived her rights, and elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf. On 25 March 2002, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be furnished an honorable discharge. 5. On 11 April 2002, she was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, for a personality disorder. She completed a total of 2 years, 7 months, and 23 days of creditable active service. 6. She provided a VA letter, dated 3 September 2010, which states, "Although you have been awarded 100 percent under the VA Compensation and Pension Division, we are obligated to base our awards on the type of discharge as reflected on your discharge certificate, DD Form 214. Your DD Form 214 does not show a disability discharge." 7. The VA has rated the applicant disabled due to a right shoulder condition and bipolar disorder. 8. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-13 provides that a Soldier may be separated for a personality disorder, not amounting to a disability under Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), that interferes with assignment to or performance of duty. The regulation requires that the condition is a deeply-ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration that interferes with the Soldier's ability to perform duty. The diagnosis of personality disorder must have been established by a psychiatrist or doctoral-level clinical psychologist. 9. Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) states that personality disorders render an individual administratively unfit rather than unfit because of physical illness or medical disability. These conditions will be dealt with through administrative channels. 10. Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 61, provides disability retirement or separation for a member who is physically unfit to perform the duties of his or her office, rank, grade, or rating because of a disability incurred while entitled to basic pay. 11. Title 38, U.S. Code, sections 310 and 331, permits the VA to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service. The VA, however, is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further military service. The VA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge, or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends she was discharged due to medical reasons. 2. The evidence shows she was diagnosed with a personality disorder with dependent personality traits by competent and appropriate military medical authorities. As a result, she was honorably discharged on 11 April 2002 for a personality disorder. Since the governing regulation states that personality disorders render an individual administratively unfit rather than unfit because of physical illness or medical disability, there is no basis for granting her request for a medical discharge. 3. It is acknowledged she has been awarded 100-percent disability under the VA Compensation and Pension Division. However, a rating action by the VA does not necessarily demonstrate an error or injustice on the part of the Army. The VA, operating under its own policies and regulations, assigns disability ratings as it sees fit. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ 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. __________x_______________ CHAIRPERSON 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100029165 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100029165 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1