RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        6 December 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050009568


      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. Bernard P. Ingold             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Donald W. Steenfott           |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. Montgomery          |     |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 that his administrative discharge be changed to
a medical separation.

2.  The applicant states he enlisted in the Regular Army shortly after
graduating from high school.  About 3 months before his scheduled
separation he suffered a nervous breakdown that changed his whole life.  He
went home sick, but he did not know how sick he was.  He reenlisted after a
short period of time.  He survived about 5 months, until he realized he
could not perform his duties.  That was when he wanted out of the Army.  He
was then told he had a character and behavior disorder, and he was
separated without a disability rating.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his service medical records.

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

1.  Counsel requests the applicant's separation for unsuitability be
changed to show he was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List
(TDRL) for schizophrenia.

2.  Counsel states the applicant's medical records show no psychiatric
complaints until shortly before his expiration term of service (ETS) during
his first enlistment.  He presented to medical personnel in June 1972 with
nervousness, loose associations, poor thought organization and "flighty
ideas."  The preliminary assessment was Acute Anxiety; however, after an 11-
day hospitalization he was diagnosed with Schizophrenic Reaction, Paranoid
Type, acute, severe.  His impairment for future military service was opined
to be "severe."  He was hospitalized again, ending after 17 days on 12 July
1973.  The final diagnosis was continued as acute Schizophrenic Reaction,
Paranoid Type, treated and improved.  It was noted his condition was in
remission with "no impairment for further military duty."

3.  Counsel states the applicant reentered the Army on 20 August 1973.  He
requested to see a psychiatrist on 17 September 1973, complaining of
insomnia and not getting along with other people.  The next day, a social
worker diagnosed him with "Schizoid Personality manifested by social
isolation and withdrawn behavior."  The applicant was separated for having
a character and behavior disorder.

4.  Counsel states the applicant was hospitalized by the Veterans
Administration (VA) on 1 October 1973 after being treated for
"Schizophrenia, chronic, undifferentiated."  Psychiatrists examined him on
11 February 1975 and offered only the diagnosis of Schizophrenia, Paranoid
Type.  The applicant now carries a 100 percent VA evaluation for
Schizophrenia.

5.  Counsel states it appears the Army, during the applicant's first period
of service, made a sincere and competent effort to treat and identify the
psychiatric disorder afflicting him.  Since the condition was noted to be
in remission at his scheduled date of separation, he would have been
considered presumptively fit for separation.  Counsel's criticism rests
with the applicant's second period of service.  Given his recent history of
significant (even if acute) psychotic disorder, when he presented to the
social worker with symptoms of a psychiatric nature it should have provoked
a reassessment of the recent diagnostic and therapeutic periods of
hospitalization and findings.  That he could have been diagnosed with an
acquired psychiatric disorder of a psychotic nature and then in a matter of
little more than weeks be classified as unsuitable due to a character or
behavior disorder is logically impossible.

6.  Counsel states the unequivocal evidence shows the applicant's
Schizophrenia that was emerging in June 1973 was not acute and was not a
mere character or personality disorder.  He should have been placed on the
TDRL instead of given an unsuitability discharge.  Then, after the VA
diagnosed him with Schizophrenia only months later, he could have been
referred to a PEB during his first TDRL re-examination.  It is plain that
no less than a 30 percent disability rating would have been warranted.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 4 January 1974.  The original application submitted in this
case was dated   10 May 2004.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 August 1970 for 3
years.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training
and was awarded military occupational specialty 15E (Pershing Missile
Crewman).

4.  On 10 June 1973, while in Germany, the applicant sought treatment for a
complaint of being nervous about pressure on his unit, depressed, and
feeling bad.  He was initially diagnosed with Acute Anxiety.

5.  The applicant was hospitalized, where he related that he felt his wife
was in danger, that people were talking about him outside his room, that
his friends were discussing his problems, and that his speech was "mixed
up" and having a direct effect on people's actions (e.g., his use of the
wrong pronoun would cause people to become very upset).  The examining
physician found the applicant related in a distant, suspicious way; his
affect was flat; his speech coherent but loose.  The applicant voiced
paranoid delusional thinking and many ideas of reference.  He denied
hallucinations.  The applicant was placed on Stellarzine and integrated
into milieu therapy.  He began to behave in a more appropriate manner.

6.  The applicant was diagnosed with Schizophrenic Reaction, Paranoid Type,
acute, severe, manifested by confusion, inappropriate behavior, paranoid
delusional thinking, and flat affect.  Stress:  separation from the Army in
the near future.  Predispositon unknown.  Impairment for the military
service severe.  Condition treated, improved.  He was medically evacuated
to the States.

7.  The applicant was hospitalized at Fort Gordon, GA on 25 June 1973.  On
admission, his mental status was found to be friendly and cooperative with
no thought disorder.  There was some evidence of very vague paranoid
delusions.  There were no hallucinations.  Affect was appropriate.  He made
a rapid and adequate adjustment to the ward milieu.  It was noted his ETS
was 3 August 1973, and since he had made a rapid and successful recovery it
was decided no further action was necessary.  He was diagnosed with Acute
Schizophrenic Reaction, Paranoid Type, moderate, manifested by confusion,
inappropriate behavior, paranoid delusions, and flat affect; moderate
stress of active duty life overseas and nearing ETS; treated and in
remission with no impairment for further military duty.  The disposition
was to discharge him after his ETS to his home.  His condition upon his
discharge was listed as "good."

8.  On 12 July 1973, the applicant was released from active duty and
transferred to the U. S. Army Reserve.

9.  On 15 August 1973, the applicant completed an enlistment physical
examination.  On the reverse of his Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical
History), the applicant checked "no" to item 16 (Have you ever been treated
for   a mental condition? (If yes, specify when, where, and give details)).
 He checked "no" to item 19 (Have you ever been a patient in any type of
hospital? (If yes, specify when, where, why, and name of doctor and
complete address of hospital)).

10.  On the applicant's Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination),
no psychiatric problems were noted (item 42) and he was found qualified for
enlistment.

11.  On 20 August 1973, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army.

12.  On 17 September 1973, the applicant sought treatment for complaints of
insomnia and not getting along with other people.  A social
worker/psychiatric specialist (not an M.D.) diagnosed him with Schizoid
Personality manifested by social isolation and withdrawn behavior and
recommended discharge under chapter 13 [Army Regulation 635-200] as
unsuitable because of a character and behavior disorder.

13.  In an AE Form 3087 (Report of Psychiatric Examination) dated
        19 September 1973, Major B___, Medical Corps, Psychiatrist, noted
the applicant had been hospitalized for a "nervous" (quotes used in the
original) condition during a previous tour of duty.  Since his reassignment
to Germany, the applicant had complained of an inability to relate to other
people and difficulty adjusting to his environment.  In addition, he had
been suffering from prolonged insomnia.  Major B___ found no evidence of
psychosis, neurosis, or mental defect and recommended the applicant be
discharged as unsuitable because of a character and behavior disorder.

14.  On 2 October 1973, the applicant completed a Standard Form 93.  He
noted his present health and medications currently used as "Restless and a
little nervous.  I'm taking Thorazine pills for relaxation."  On the
reverse of his Standard Form 93, he again checked "no" to item 16 and item
19.

15.  On 12 December 1973, the applicant was notified of his commander's
intent to initiate action to effect his discharge under the provisions of
paragraph         13-5b(2) for unsuitability.  The applicant waived
consideration of his case by a board of officers.  He elected not to submit
a statement in his own behalf.  He waived a psychiatric examination in
connection with that action.

16.  On 13 December 1973, the applicant's commander recommended the
applicant be separated for unsuitability.  On 21 December 1973, the
recommendation was approved.  On 4 January 1974, the applicant was
honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
paragraph 13.

17.  The applicant provided an Augusta, GA VA Hospital, Outpatient
Department, Psychiatric Examination dated 11 February 1975.  That document
noted they had a Columbia VA Hospital psychiatric examination dated 1
August 1974 in which the applicant was given a diagnosis of Schizoid
Personality.  The Augusta, GA VA Hospital diagnosed him with Schizophrenia,
Paranoid Type, presently in but moderate remission.

18.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  At the time, chapter 13 contained the
policy and outlined the procedures for separating an individual for
unsuitability when it was clearly established it was unlikely he would
develop sufficiently to participate in further military training and/or
become a satisfactory Soldier.  Paragraph 13-5b(2) provided for the
separation of a Soldier who, as determined by medical authority, evidenced
character and behavior disorders when such disorders were chronic and
recalcitrant to attempts at rehabilitation and interfered with the
Soldier's ability to adequately perform his duties.

19.  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.  It prescribes the function of the TDRL and states the
TDRL is used in the nature of a “pending list.”  It provides a safeguard
for the Government against permanently retiring a Soldier who can later
fully recover, or nearly recover, from the disability causing him or her to
be unfit.  Conversely, the TDRL safeguards the Soldier from being
permanently retired with a condition that may reasonably be expected to
develop into a more serious permanent disability.  A Soldier who is
determined to be physically fit will not be placed on the TDRL regardless
of the severity of the physical defects or the fact that they might become
unfitting were the Soldier to remain on active duty for a period of time.

20.  Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), in effect at
the time,
stated that personality disorders, to include character and behavior
disorders, were considered to render an individual administratively unfit
rather than unfit because of physical disability.  Interference with
performance of effective duty would be dealt with through appropriate
administrative channels.

21.  Army Regulation 40-501, in effect at the time, stated that a history
of a psychoneurotic reaction which caused hospitalization was a cause for
rejection for enlistment.

22.  Army Regulation 40-501, in effect at the time, also stated that,
during the psychiatric interview (for an entrance examination), the
examinee's behavior would be observed and an estimate made of his current
mental status.  Any evidence of disorganized or unclear thinking, or
unusual thought control, of undue suspiciousness or of apathy or
"strangeness" would be noted.  Any unusual emotional expression such as
depression, expansiveness, withdrawal, or marked anxiety, which was out of
keeping with the content of the interview would be carefully evaluated.

23.  Army Regulation 635-10 (Processing Personnel for Separation), in
effect at the time, stated that upon an enlisted Soldier's separation the
DD Form 722 (Health Record) and DD Form 722-1 (Health Record – Dental)
would be forwarded to the U. S. Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation
Center, Fort Benjamin Harrison, IN.  If the Soldier applied for service-
connected compensation during transfer processing, the records would be
forwarded to the appropriate VA Regional Office.

24.  The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition
(DSM-IV) states that the essential features of Schizophrenia are a mixture
of characteristic signs and symptoms (both positive and negative) that have
been present for a significant portion of time during a 1-month period (or
for a shorter time if successfully treated), with some signs of the
disorder persisting for at least 6 months (Criteria A and C).  These signs
and symptoms are associated with marked social or occupational dysfunction
(Criterion B).  The diagnostic criteria for Schizophrenia are:

      A.  Characteristic symptoms (Two (or more) of the following, each
present for a significant portion of time during a 1-month period (or less
if successfully treated)):  (1) delusions; (2) hallucinations; (3)
disorganized speech; (4) grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior; and
(5) negative symptoms, i.e., affective flattening, alogia, or avolition.

      B.  Social/occupational dysfunction:  For a significant portion of
the time since the onset of the disturbance, one or more major areas of
functioning such as work, interpersonal relations, or self-care are
markedly below the level achieved prior to the onset.

      C.  Duration:  Continuous signs of the disturbance persist for at
least         6 months.  This 6-month period must include at least 1 month
of symptoms (or less if successfully treated) that meet Criterion A (i.e.,
active-phase symptoms) and may include periods of prodromal or residual
symptoms.  During these prodromal or residual periods, the signs of the
disturbance may be manifested by only negative symptoms or two or more
symptoms listed in criterion A present in an attenuated form.

25.  The DSM-IV states the essential feature of Schizoid Personality
Disorder is a pervasive pattern of detachment from social relationships and
a restricted range of expression of emotions in interpersonal settings.
The diagnostic criteria for Schizoid Personality Disorder are:

      A.  A pervasive pattern of detachment from social relationships and a
restricted range of expression of emotions in interpersonal settings, as
indicated by (four or more) of the following:

      (1)  neither desires nor enjoys close relationships, including being
part of a family; (2) almost always chooses solitary activities; (3) has
little, if any interest in having sexual experiences with another person;
(4) takes pleasure in few, if any , activities; (5) lacks close friends or
confidants other than first-degree relatives; (6) appears indifferent to
the praise or criticism of others; and (7) shows emotional coldness,
detachment, or flattened affectivity; and

      B.  Does not occur exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia, a
mood disorder with psychotic features, another psychotic disorder, or a
pervasive developmental disorder and is not due to the direct physiological
effects of a general medical condition.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Army has an interest in promoting the reliability of its medical
records.  Alteration of a diagnosis in those records after the fact may
lead to fundamental questions about the veracity of the records in this
case and in general.  For these reasons, the Board declines to alter the
diagnosis of character and behavior disorder in the applicant’s medical
records.  The Secretary’s interest is in ensuring an orderly system in
which a physician makes certain observations and recording them faithfully
in the medical records at the time.  It would take an extraordinary showing
for the Board to alter such a diagnosis.

2.  In this case, the applicant’s physician (Major B___, Medical Corps,
Psychiatrist) made a diagnosis in good faith and based upon accepted
medical principles at the time.  That observation was duly recorded in the
applicant’s medical records and he has not presented sufficient reason to
alter that observation.

3.  Moreover, the Army was not the only agency to diagnose the applicant
with a personality disorder or a character and behavior disorder.  It
appears a Columbia VA Hospital psychiatric examination dated 1 August 1974
also offered a diagnosis of Schizoid Personality.

4.  In addition, the applicant's prior service health records had been
shipped to the U. S. Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center upon his
July 1973 separation.  The examining physicians at the entrance station in
August 1973 would not have known he had prior mental problems unless the
applicant informed them or unless he showed "strange" behavior during the
psychiatric interview.  He failed to indicate on his Standard Form 93 that
he had been treated for a mental condition and that he had been a patient
in a hospital for treatment of a mental condition.  It appears he presented
no "strange" behavior during the psychiatric interview and so was found to
be qualified for enlistment.
Had that medical information been discovered after he enlisted, he could
have been separated for fraudulent enlistment.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 4 January 1974; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on           3 January 1977.  The applicant did not file
within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling
explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice
to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__bpi___  __dws___  __eem___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations
prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the
statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records
of the individual concerned.




                                  __Bernard P. Ingold___
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2005000568                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051206                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |108.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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