RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           30 November 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040000063


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John N. Slone                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Shirley Powell                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Patrick H. McGann             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, via six separate applications, reconsideration
of his request that he be retired from the Army by reason of physical
disability.  In addition, he also requests (in the application dated 20
August 2004) that he be retired as an officer, either a second or first
lieutenant or a captain.

2.  The applicant states that he was discharged for a mental disorder but
he believes he had more disabilities that were not considered.  He also
states (in the application dated 20 August 2004) that he served as an
officer while in the military.

3.  The applicant provides extracts from his Navy and Army service
personnel and medical records; documents regarding medical treatment
subsequent to his separation from active duty; extracts from his Department
of Veterans Affairs (VA) records; a multitude of additional documents
including letters and documents associated with his postal service and
education; several VA Rating Decisions to include one dated 15 September
2004; the first page of a Board for Correction of Naval Records decision
dated 8 December 2003; and the first page of a Social Security
Administration Notice of Hearing dated 15 September 2004.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were
summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR2003092278 on 25 March 2004.

2.  The VA Rating Decision dated 15 September 2004, the Board for
Correction of Naval Records document dated 8 December 2003, and the Social
Security Administration Notice of Hearing document dated 15 September 2004
are new evidence which will be considered by the Board.  In addition, the
applicant's contention that he served as an officer is a new contention
that will be addressed.

3.  The applicant was a member of the U. S. Naval Reserve on active duty
from 21 November 1984 until 9 September 1988, when he was honorably
discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment.  He reenlisted on 10
September 1988 and served on active duty until 9 September 1991 when he was
honorably separated in pay grade E-4.

4.  The applicant processed for enlistment in the Regular Army in 2000.  He
indicated on his enlistment physical examination that his health was "good"
and he was found medically qualified for enlistment.  On 23 February 2000,
he enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-4.  He served in military
occupational specialty 71L (Administrative Specialist).

5.  The applicant's Army medical records indicate that he was treated for a
variety of ailments to include allergies, sleep apnea, low back pain,
eczema, hemorrhoids, and rashes.  In July and August 2001, he was seen at
the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center's Psychiatry Clinic for depression
issues.

6.  On 8 March 2002, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.
The examining psychiatrist found the applicant not to have a severe mental
disorder and was not considered to be mentally disordered.  However, the
psychiatrist found that the applicant manifested a long-standing disorder
of character, behavior, and adaptability that was of such severity as to
preclude adequate military service.  The psychiatrist noted that the
applicant had been seen eleven times at the Division Mental Health clinic
due to chronic difficulties adjusting to military life due to personality
traits that were ingrained and unlikely to change.  The applicant was found
to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in [board]
proceedings, to be mentally responsible, to meet the retention requirements
of Army Regulation 40-501, and to be psychiatrically cleared for any action
deemed appropriate by his command.

7.  On 28 March 2002, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under
the Uniform Code of Military Justice for failing to go to his appointed
place of duty; using disrespectful language toward a noncommissioned
officer; and wrongfully and without authority wearing the insignia of a
sergeant, E-5.  His punishment was to be reduced to private first class, E-
3, to forfeit $336.00 pay (suspended), and to perform extra duty for 14
days.

8.  Separation action on the applicant under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13 for personality disorder was initiated
and the applicant requested a hearing before a board.  On 3 October 2002, a
board was held.  The applicant testified in his own behalf.  He testified
in part that he learned he had a really hard time in administration and
that he would do better at something physical.  He needed to find the right
occupation where he could be happy and get along with his fellow workers.
He needed to find a way to work with others better.  His interaction with
people was where he thought he was failing.

9.  The board recommended the applicant be discharged due to a personality
disorder.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation and
directed the applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge.

10.  On 18 November 2002, the applicant was discharged, with an honorable
characterization of service, in pay grade E-3, under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, personality disorder.  He had completed
a total of 8 years, 5 months, and 13 days of creditable active service with
no lost time.

11.  In April 2003, the VA awarded the applicant a 10 percent disability
rating for depression.

12.  A 13 May 2003 statement from a physician indicated that "based on this
session today and available records/history, the diagnosis of Personality
Disorder seems very appropriate."

13.  The applicant provided the first page of a Board for Correction of
Naval Records decision dated 8 December 2003.  This document states in
part, "…There is no information in the available records that suggests that
you were unfit for duty at that time.  The fact that you were discharged
from the Amy on   10 July 2002 because of a mental disorder, and that the
Department of Veterans Affairs recently awarded you a 10% rating for a
condition incurred during your period of Army service, and 0% ratings for
two conditions incurred during your service in the Navy, were considered
insufficient to demonstrate that you were unfit for duty at the time of
your discharge from the Navy.  In addition, as you never served as a master
chief petty officer or a lieutenant, there is no basis…"

14.  In a Rating Decision dated 15 September 2004, the VA increased the
applicant's disability rating for depression, delusional disorder from 10
percent to 70 percent effective 10 October 2003; his conditions of allergic
rhinitis and epididymitis continued at zero percent; service connection for
dermatitis was denied; and service connection for low back pain,
personality disorder, left inguinal hernia, and sleep disorder remained
denied.

15.  On 15 September 2004, the Social Security Administration notified the
applicant he was scheduled for a hearing on 14 December 2004.

16.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  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.

17.  Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of
soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of
physical disability.  The unfitness is of such a degree that a soldier is
unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank or rating in such a
way as to reasonably fulfill the purpose of his employment on active duty.

18.  Army Regulation 40-501 governs medical fitness standards for
enlistment, retention and separation.  Paragraph 3-35 states that a
personality disorder may render an individual administratively unfit rather
than unfit because of physical disability.  Interference with performance
of effective duty in association with this condition will be dealt with
through appropriate administrative channels.

19.  The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th
edition, lists depression as a mood disorder.

20.  Army Regulation 40-501, paragraph 3-32 states that an affective
disorder (mood disorder) is a cause for referral to a medical evaluation
board (MEB) if symptoms are persistent or recurrent sufficient to require
extended or recurrent hospitalization, necessity for limitations of duty or
duty in a protected environment or results in interference with effective
military performance.

21.  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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows that competent military medical authority,
a psychiatrist, diagnosed the applicant with a personality disorder, not a
mental disorder.  The military psychiatrist specifically determined that
the applicant was not considered to be mentally disordered.  It appears
this diagnosis was confirmed shortly after the applicant separated when a
physician, around May 2003, indicated that "based on this session today and
available records/history, the diagnosis of Personality Disorder seems very
appropriate."

2.  The evidence of record does show the applicant was seen for depression
issues while in the Army; however, there is no evidence to show that his
depression met the criteria for referral to an MEB.  There is no evidence
to show that he had depression symptoms persistent or recurrent sufficient
to require extended or recurrent hospitalization.  From his testimony at
his board hearing,   it was his personality disorder that interfered with
his effective military performance, not his depression.

3.  There is no evidence of record that shows the applicant had any other
medical conditions that would have rendered him unfit for duty and
therefore eligible for referral to an MEB.  Indeed, the VA has not awarded
him a disability rating (other than a zero percent rating) for any medical
condition other than his depression.

4.  The 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.  The
VA is not required by law to determine medical unfitness for further
military service in awarding a disability rating, only that a medical
condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the
individual concerned.  Consequently, due to the two concepts involved
(i.e., the more stringent standard by which a soldier is determined not to
be medically fit for duty versus the standard by which a civilian would be
determined to be socially or industrially impaired), an individual’s
medical condition may be determined to be not unfitting by the Army and yet
be rated by the VA as disabling (or vice versa).

5.  In addition, the VA has the responsibility and jurisdiction to
recognize any changes in a medical condition over time by adjusting a
disability rating.  An increase in the VA's rating for a condition still
does not mean that the condition was unfitting while the member was in the
Army.

6.  Any action the Social Security Administration might take would not
change the fact there is no evidence of record to show the applicant was
unfit for duty at the time he separated from the Army.

7.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant has provided no
evidence to show that he ever served as an officer in either the Army or
the Navy.  The partial document from the Board for Correction of Naval
Records that he provided states that he never served as a lieutenant in the
Navy.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jns____  __sp____  __phm___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of
the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR2003092278 dated 25 March 2004.




            __John N. Slone______
                    CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040000063                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20041130                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |108.01                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]