IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	22 September 2009    

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090008041 


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, that the following items on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected:

	a.  Item 25 (Separation Authority),

	b.  Item 26 (Separation Program Code (SPD)),

	c.  Item 27 (Reenlistment Code), and

	d.  Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the codes on the DD Form 214 are used to discriminate.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a extract of an internet article from a website in support of this application.

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 record shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 21 September 1981.  

3.  On 28 February 1983, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  The examining psychiatrist diagnosed him with an Anti-Social Personality Disorder: Chronic, Severe.  The examining psychiatrist strongly recommended that the applicant be separated expeditiously because he met the criteria in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations), paragraph 
5-13, administrative separation for personality disorder, not amenable to hospitalization, treatment, transfer, disciplinary action, training, or reclassification to another type of duty.  

4.  The applicant’s unit commander notified him that he was contemplating action to separate him under the provisions of paragraph 5-13, Army Regulation 
635-200, based on his diagnosed personality disorder.  

5.  On 14 March 1983, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, its effects and of the rights available to him.  Subsequent to his counseling, the applicant elected not to submit statements in his own behalf. 

6.  The separation authority approved the applicant’s separation under the provisions of paragraph 5-13, Army Regulation 635-200 due to a personality disorder and directed that the applicant receive an honorable discharge.  On 
12 April 1983, the applicant was discharged accordingly.

7.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant upon his separation confirms, in item 25 (Separation Authority), that the authority for his separation was paragraph 5-13, Army Regulation 635-200.  His DD Form 214 shows the following entries:

	a. Item 25 list the Separation Authority as "Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13", 

	b.  Item 26 lists the Separation Program Designator (SPD) code as "JFX (JMB)",

	c. Item 27 list the Reenlistment Code as "RE-3", and

	d.  item 28 lists the Narrative Reason for his Separation as "personality disorder."  

The applicant authenticated the DD Form 214 with his signature in item 21 (Signature of Member Being Separated).  

8.  The applicant submitted an unofficial extract of an internet article subject:  DD-214 Codes Used by Some to Discriminate which cites case of former Service members who felt they were discriminated against because they received an honorable discharge but less than honorable reasons for their discharges.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 provides that a Soldier may be separated for personality disorder, not amounting to disability, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty.  The regulation requires that the condition is a deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration that interferes with the 
Soldier’s ability to perform duty.  It further specifies that the service of Soldiers separated under this provision will be characterized as honorable unless it is an entry-level status separation, in which case it will be uncharacterized.  

10.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directives) for separating Soldiers from active duty and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.  The SPD code of JFX (JMB) is the appropriate code to assign Soldiers separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-13, Army Regulation 635-200, for personality disorder.  Additionally, the SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table establishes RE-3 as the proper reentry code to assign Soldiers separated with an SPD code of JFX (JMB).  SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations that identify reasons for, and types of, separation from active duty. The primary purpose of SPD codes is to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation.  RE codes are used to determine if whether or not one may reenlist or enlist in a military service at a later time.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no evidence in the extract of the internet article nor did the applicant submit any additional evidence that shows he was discriminated in the processing of his separation.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder by competent medical authority.  Based on this diagnosis, the separation authority, separation code, RE code, and narrative reason for separation were designated in accordance with the applicable regulations.  All requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

2.  The applicant argued that SPD and RE codes provide derogatory information about Soldiers.  However, SPD codes which form a statistical basis for the Army to monitor discharges, and RE codes, which are intended to provide information about reenlistment eligibility are merely a reflection of a Soldier's service and the basis for his separation. 

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must satisfactorily show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

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)                                         AR20090008041



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1