RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  22 February 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060010203 


	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

Mr. Michael J. Fowler

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Mark D. Manning

Chairperson

Mr. John T. Meixell

Member

Ms. Qawiy A. Sabree

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 the narrative reason for separation be changed on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with the period ending 31 December 1985.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was young and immature at the time of his separation and he would like to have the opportunity to enlist and serve his country.  He further states that homesickness contributed to his offense.

3.  The applicant provides his personal resume.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which occurred on 31 December 1985.  The application submitted in this case is dated 21 July 2006.

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 13 November 1985 and did not successfully complete basic training.  

4.  On 19 November 1985, the applicant received an unfavorable counseling statement for threatening and attempting to take his own life.  

5.  On 26 November 1985, the applicant underwent a mental evaluation by a military psychiatrist.  The psychiatrist diagnosed the applicant with mixed personality disorder.  The psychiatrist stated that the applicant exhibited dependent, impulsive, immature, histrionic and schizotypal traits, as well as periodic dissociative states.

6.  The military psychiatrist determined that the applicant could distinguish right from wrong and that he possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative or judicial proceedings.  The military psychiatrist further stated that "This type of problem is unlikely to respond to disciplinary action, reclassification, further training or medical treatment in any reasonable length of time."  He recommended that the applicant be separated under the provisions of chapter 5 of Army Regulation 600-200.

7.  On 6 December 1985, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for intentionally injuring himself by cutting his wrist.  

8.  On 12 December 1985, action was initiated to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5 personality disorder.  On 12 December 1985, the applicant acknowledged notification of this action.  He indicated that he did not desire to consult with counsel and that he did not desire to make a statement in his behalf.

9.  On 23 December 1985, the appropriate authority approved the elimination packet under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5.  On 
31 December 1985, the applicant separated from the service after completing 
1 month and 22 days of creditable active service.  His DD Form 214 shows in item 27 (Reenlistment Code) the entry "RE-4" (ineligible for enlistment) and in item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) the entry "PERSONALITY DISORDER."
   
10.  Army Regulation 635-200 chapter 5, 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.  This 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 with necessary and appropriate professional credentials who is privileged to conduct mental health evaluations for the Department of Defense components.  Separation because of 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Evidence of record confirms that the applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder by a competent military medical authority.  Based on this diagnosis, his separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation.  All requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

2.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 31 December 1985; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 
30 December 1988.  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

__MDM__  ___JTM     __QAS__  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.




__    Mark D. Manning       _
          CHAIRPERSON





INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060010203
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
21 FEBRUARY 2007
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
MR. SCHWARTZ
ISSUES         1.
144.2900.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.