IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  8 October 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090007926 


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, in effect, her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) Item 24 (Character of Service) be changed to honorable and that Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) also be changed to reflect an honorable discharge. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she does not believe that she had a personality disorder at the time of discharge.  She states that while she was in the service she was of sound and stable mind.  She also states, in effect, if she had not been paid for 7 days of leave she could have been credited with 90 days of service; therefore, she was railroaded out of the military.

3.  In support of her application, the applicant provides copies of her military records and her medical records from the Valley-Wide Health Systems, Inc., La Junta, Colorado.

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.  The applicant's military records show she enlisted in the Army Delayed Entry Program on 28 January 1991.  She enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade 
E-1, on 1 August 1991, for a period of 5 years.  She did not complete basic training, and she was not awarded a military occupational specialty.

3.  Documentation submitted by the applicant shows she was counseled from August through October 1991 for the following:  failing to meet the minimum standards for the Diagnostic Physical Readiness Test (DPRT); displaying a lack of motivation through her actions and body language; not meeting the standards of personal appearance and individual area maintenance; failing to retain significant portions of non-testable information:  code of conduct, identification, and wear of uniform; keeping a filthy wall locker; displaying unshined boots; smelling bad; having dirty clothing in her wall locker; failing to meet the minimum standard of the basic rifle marksmanship (BRM); failing to meet the standards for the third DPRT; failing to meet the standards for the Army Physical Fitness Test; being recommended to be "new started" due to her inability to meet the standards for the third DPRT; possible separation in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Separations), Chapter 5; failing to complete BRM training because of profile or sick call; consistently displaying a negative attitude; being disrespectful towards a non-commissioned officer; and making a suicide gesture by cutting her legs with a razor.  

4.  A Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 8 October 1991, shows the applicant's behavior was found to be normal.  She was fully alert and fully oriented.  Her mood or affect was unremarkable, her thinking process was clear, her thought content was normal, and her memory was good.  The evaluating psychiatrist found the applicant to be mentally responsible and to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in separation proceedings.  The evaluating psychiatrist diagnosed the applicant as having an Avoidant Personality Disorder.  The evaluating psychiatrist also opined that the applicant had been "malingering."  Manifestations of the applicant's personality disorder included a history of difficulty interacting with others, no confidants for her entire life, avoidance of social situations because of fear of appearing foolish, preference for being alone and for solitary activities, and a tendency for self abusive and self destructive behavior.  The latter included extensive drug and alcohol use.  It was determined the foregoing personality traits could make the applicant a danger to herself or others particularly in a combat situation and made her potential questionable as a Soldier.  The evaluating psychiatrist further stated that although the applicant was motivated to return to training, continued problems were likely.  The recommendation was that she be administratively separated from the Army under the provisions of Chapter 5-13.

5.  On 10 October 1991, the applicant's unit commander notified the applicant that he was taking action to separate her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13.  The unit commander stated, in effect, he was initiating the proposed action as a result of the applicant being diagnosed as having a personality disorder.  That disorder coupled with her inability to complete the required training had rendered her unsuitable for the successful completion of basic training.  He also advised the applicant of her option to elect or decline a separation medical examination.  On the same day, the applicant elected not to undergo a separation medical examination.

6.  On 10 October 1991, the applicant’s unit commander recommended she be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 13, for personality disorder.

7.  On 10 October 1991, the applicant declined the opportunity to consult with counsel and acknowledged the proposed elimination action to separate her for a personality disorder under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13, its effects, and the rights available to her.  The applicant waived her rights to consideration of her case by an administrative separation board of officers and elected not to submit statements in her own behalf.  

8.  On 11 October 1991, the applicant's battalion commander recommended approval of the applicant's separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13.

9.  On 16 October 1991, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation with an uncharacterized discharge.  

10.  The applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1 on 24 October 1991, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-13, for Personality Disorder.  She was credited with completing 2 months and 24 days of net active service.  Item 16 (Days Accrued Leave Paid) of her DD Form 214 shows she was paid for 7 days of accrued leave.

11.  The evidence, a properly completed DD Form 214, has the applicant's signature which attests to the completeness and the accuracy of information shown on the DD Form 214.

12.  The medical records that the applicant submitted from the Valley-Wide Health Systems, Inc., show she utilized regular outpatient services, emergency services, advocacy, and psychiatric services from 1997 through 2009 and that she has been diagnosed with a Schizoaffective Disorder.  

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 Chapter 5, paragraph 5-13, specifies that a Soldier could be separated for personality disorders (not amounting to disability) that interferes with assignment or with performance of duty, when so disposed as indicated in 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.  When it is determined that separation under this paragraph is appropriate, the unit commander will take the actions specified in the notification procedure.  The service of a Soldier separated per this paragraph will be characterized as honorable unless an entry-level separation is required under chapter 3, section III.  

14.  Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 3, paragraph 3-9, specifies that a separation will be described as entry-level with service uncharacterized if processing is initiated while a Soldier is in entry-level status.  For Regular Army Soldiers, entry-level status is the first 180 days of continuous active duty or the first 180 days of continuous active duty following a break of more than 92 days of active military service.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to a change of her narrative reason for separation.  She has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief she now requests.  

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 August 1991, was discharged on 24 October 1991, and was credited with completing 60 days of service.  She was issued a DD Form 214 that shows in Item 24 her character of service as uncharacterized.  She was in an entry-level status at the time of discharge; therefore, her characterization of service was properly described as uncharacterized.  Based on the foregoing, the applicant is not entitled to correction of Item 24 of her DD Form 214 to show her character of service as honorable.  

3.  The applicant also contends that Item 28 of her DD Form 214 is incorrect, because she did not have a personality disorder at the time of discharge.  However, the evidence shows during the applicant's service she underwent a mental status evaluation, in which she was assessed and diagnosed with a personality disorder.  The evaluating psychiatrist opined that the applicant's maladaptive pattern of behavior reflected a long-standing, deeply ingrained personality disorder and it was highly unlikely that further rehabilitative efforts, counseling, or punishment would have a beneficial effect upon her.  The evaluating psychiatrist opined that the applicant's diagnosis did not warrant discharge through medical channels and recommended she be administratively separated from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13.

4.  Contrary to the applicant's assertions that she was "railroaded out of the military," the evidence shows she acknowledged the proposed elimination action to separate her for personality disorder under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-13, she declined to consult with counsel, waived her rights to have her case considered by an administrative separation board, and elected not to submit statements in her own behalf.  Therefore, the evidence clearly shows the applicant understood her reason for discharge and the type of discharge that she would be issued.

5.  The applicant's separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized her rights.  The reason for separation was appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

6.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with her application, or the evidence of record, that the narrative reason for separation on her DD Form 214 is incorrect.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to correction of Item 28 of her DD Form 214.  She has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief she now requests.  

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 that 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)                                         AR20090007926



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090007926



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1