RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  14 June 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060017651 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Ms. Joyce A. Wright

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Margaret K. Patterson

Chairperson

Mr. Ronald D. Gant

Member

Mr. Rowland C. Heflin

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, in effect, that item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), be corrected to show the entry "Bi-Poplar Disorder" instead of the entry "Personality Disorder."

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has been diagnosed with Bi-Popar Disorder by the VA (Veterans Administration) Medical Center in Cincinnati, Ohio.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy a discharge summary from the VA Medical Center in Cincinnati, Ohio, in support of his request.  

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 27 October 1986, the date of his discharge.  The application submitted in this case is dated 30 August 2006 but was received for processing on 19 December 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's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 August 1983.  The applicant successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual training at Fort Benning, Georgia.  On completion of his OSUT (one station unit training), he was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS), 11B, Light Weapons Infantryman.  He was advanced to pay grade E-4 effective 1 September 1984. 

4.  On 9 January 1986, he was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 18 to 19 December 1985.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to E-3 (suspended) and 14 days restriction and extra duty.

5.  On 23 July 1986, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  His mental status evaluation revealed a fully oriented, alert individual, whose behavior was normal.  His mood or affect was flat and unremarkable, thinking process was clear, and his thought content was normal.  He possessed sufficient mental capacity and was mentally responsible to understand and participate in proceedings.  He met the retentions requirements of Army Regulation 40-501, chapter 3.  He was referred by his commander for psychological evaluation and management recommendations.  The psychologist found no evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through military channels.  The evaluation indicated that he was not suicidal at that time.  He had stated that he would kill himself rather than go to prison; if it was determined that he was to be sentenced to prison, the psychologist opined he should immediately be placed in confinement under strict supervision.  The applicant expressed motivation for continued service.  He was offered counseling for his personal benefit, but declined. 

6.  On 25 September 1986, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that action was being initiated to discharge him from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13, for personality disorder.  
He was informed that, if his recommendation was approved, the least favorable characterization of service he could receive was an honorable discharge.  He based his recommendation on the applicant’s attempted suicide, by taking an overdose of pills, which implied that he had serious adjustment and behavior problems.  

7.  The applicant acknowledged receipt and consulted with counsel.  He waived his rights and elected not to submit statements in his own behalf.  He requested treatment in a VA Medical Center.

8.  On 26 September 1986, the commander submitted his recommendation to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13. 

9.  On 30 September 1986, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation.  He was diagnosed with a personality disorder meeting the requirements for discharge in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph   5-13.




10.  On 7 October 1986, the separation authority approved the recommendation for the applicant’s discharge and directed that he be furnished an honorable discharge certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 27 October 1986.  He had a total of 3 years and 2 months creditable service and 2 days of lost time due to AWOL.  

11.  Item 26 (Separation Code), of the applicant's DD Form 214, shows the entry "JFX" and item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), shows the entry "Personality Disorder." 

12.  The applicant's signature was affixed to item 21 (Signature of Member being Separated), of his DD Form 214, indicating he had reviewed the information shown on the form and it was complete and correct, to the best of his knowledge.

13.  The applicant provided a copy of a hospital Discharge Summary from the VA Medical Center in Cincinnati, Ohio, dated 4 October 2006.  The summary indicates that he was diagnosed with bipolar effective disorder type I, mood disorder secondary to general medical cognition, history of polysubstance dependence, and antisocial personality trait, previous concurrent.  He was admitted to the medical center on 9 February 2006 and was discharged on 13 February 2006.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel because of personality disorder.  It also provides that a Soldier may be separated for a personality disorder that interferes with 
assignment to or performance of duty, when so diagnosed by a physician trained in psychiatry.

15.  Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at that time, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation shows that the separation program designator "JFX" as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214 specifies the narrative reason for discharge as "Personality Disorder" and that the authority for discharge under this separation program designator is "Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13."





DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s discharge proceedings appear to have been conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time of his separation.

2.   The applicant was diagnosed by a trained psychiatrist and was found to have a personality disorder that met the requirements for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13. 

3.  Based upon this diagnosis and the applicant's attempted suicide, by taking an overdose of pills, which implied that he had serious adjustment and behavior problems, the commander initiated action to discharge him.  His request was approved by the appropriate authority for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13, for personality disorder.
He was honorably discharged on 27 October 1986.

4.  The Board notes that the applicant’s narrative reason for separation is correct in accordance with regulations then in effect which shows he was assigned the proper SPD code of "JFX" which corresponds with his narrative reason "Personality Disorder." 

5.  The applicant contends that item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), of his DD Form 214, should be changed to read "Bi-Polar Disorder" for better clarity and justice.  However, the applicant has provided no evidence, and there is none in the available records, to show that he was diagnosed as having a "Bi-Polar Disorder" prior to his discharge.  The evidence clearly shows that he was diagnosed as having a personality disorder.  

6.  The applicant provided a copy of a hospital Discharge Summary, dated 4 October 2006, prepared 20 years after his discharge, which diagnosed him as having a "Bi-Polar Disorder."  This evidence is insufficient to support a change in his narrative reason for separation which he now requests.  He has provided no evidence to show that his narrative reason for separation was in error or unjust.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), of his DD Form 214, to show the entry "Bi-Polar Disorder."

7.  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 failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

8.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 27 October 1986; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 26 October 1989.  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

__RCH__  __MKP__  __RDG__  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.




_____M. K. Patterson______
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060017651
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070614
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19861027
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200, chap 5. parag 5-13
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
110
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.