IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    12 April 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110020230 


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 her narrative reason for separation be changed from personality disorder to hardship. 

2.  She states the reason for separation of personality disorder was an arbitrary diagnosis.  She did not see a physician until after the opinion was made.

3.  She provides no additional documentary evidence 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.  Her military records show she enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 January 1991.  She completed training, was awarded the military occupational specialty of 73C (Finance Specialist), and was promoted to the rank/grade of 
specialist/E-4.

3.  A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Evaluation), dated 31 July 1995, signed by LTC V____, Chief, Behavioral Medicine Service shows she was evaluated due to her being considered for discharge because of a personality order.  The examiner indicated she had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings.  The examiner further indicated she was not likely to be amenable to coercion or retraining because such additional stress could cause further deterioration and result in hospitalization, psychosis, suicide gestures or attempts, or other undesirable behaviors.

4.  On 28 August 1995, the applicant's medical holding company commander notified her that he was initiating action to separate her for a personality disorder under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 5-13.  The reason for his proposed action was that her disorder was so severe her ability to function effectively in the military environment was significantly impaired.  On the same date, she acknowledged receipt of the memorandum of notification acknowledgment.

5.  On 28 August 1995, her medical holding company commander recommended her elimination due to her history of marked social inadaptability during her assignment to Ireland Army Community Hospital Medical Holding Company.  She had an unspecified personality disorder due to deficiencies in emotional and personality development of such a degree as to seriously impair her function in the military service.  She used poor judgment, was not committed to productive goals, and was unmotivated.

6.  On 31 August 1995, the applicant acknowledged that she had been advised by counsel of the basis for the contemplated action to separate her for a personality disorder under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, and its effect; of the rights available to her; and the effect of any action taken by her in waiving her rights.

7.  She submitted a statement in her own behalf for consideration.  She requested disapproval of the recommendation to eliminate her under paragraph 5-13, Army Regulation 635-200.  Instead she should be processed for medical disposition under Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation).  She stated she was never evaluated by LTC V____ and did not see how he could make such a diagnosis without an evaluation.  In contrast, she was evaluated over a 10-day period at Wright Patterson Air Force Base by psychiatrists and psychologists, who recommended a medical board process.  She further stated that while the Army may ultimately decide to discharge her, it should be pursuant to the proper and established medical evaluation process, not a short-cut as was being attempted.

8.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, for a personality disorder and directed she be furnished an honorable discharge.

9.  Her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows that on 4 October 1995 she was discharged with an honorable characterization of service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, for personality disorder.  She had completed 4 years, 9 months, and 2 days of active service.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13, in effect at the time, set the policy and prescribed procedures for separating members with a personality disorder (not amounting to a disability) that interfered with assignment to or performance of duty when it was so diagnosed that this condition was a deeply-ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration that interfered with the Soldier's ability to perform duty.  The diagnosis of personality disorder must have been established by a physician trained in psychiatry or psychiatric diagnosis.  Separation because of personality disorder was authorized only if the diagnosis concluded the disorder is so severe that the Soldier's ability to function effectively in the military environment was significantly impaired.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 states Soldiers on active duty may be discharged or released because of genuine dependency or hardship.

   a.  Dependency exists when death or disability of a member of a Soldier’s (or spouse’s) immediate family causes that member to rely upon the Soldier for principal care or support.
   
   b.  Hardship exists when in circumstances not involving death or disability of a member of the Soldier’s (or spouse’s) immediate family, separation from the Service will materially affect the care or support of the family by alleviating undue and genuine hardship.
   
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that her reason for separation was an arbitrary decision is noted.  However, she has not provided sufficient evidence to support this contention.

2.  There is no evidence to support her contention that LTC V___ did not evaluate her.  Her records show she was evaluated by a physician trained in psychiatry or psychiatric diagnosis who made a valid determination that she had a personality disorder.  No medical records regarding her evaluation at Wright Patterson Air Force Base are available.

3.  She was discharged by reason of a personality disorder.  The evidence of record confirms her separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation.  Evidence indicates all requirements of law and regulation were met and her rights were protected throughout the separation process.

4.  She requested the Board change her reason for separation to that of hardship.  The Army has policies and procedures to deal with hardships.  She has not submitted any evidence to show she properly requested assistance or separation because of genuine dependency or hardship.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient basis for granting her request.

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)                                         AR20110020230



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110020230



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1