IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  2 October 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120004394 


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, correction of his records to show he was never discharged and that he completed sufficient service for and was retired for sufficient length of service for retirement.

2.  He states his wrongful discharge deprived him of his military career.  He asks for a personal appearance before the Board to plead his case for retirement.  He was a career Soldier and would have retired with over 20 years of service but the Army elected to discharge him wrongfully and deny him that retirement.

3.  He provides no additional documentary evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 December 1980 for a period of 3 years.  He completed training as an infantryman.  On 19 October 1983, he reenlisted for a period of 4 years.  He was promoted to pay grade E-6 on 16 January 1986.

2.  On 30 May 1986, he underwent a mental status evaluation which indicated he was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong, and mentally competent to participate in board proceedings.  The examining psychiatrist also indicated he was experiencing an adjustment reaction to the reasonable demands of military service and he did not possess the essential characterologic [sic] and emotional strength necessary to continue to be an effective Soldier.  The psychiatrist recommended the applicant be considered for administrative action deemed appropriate by the command, to include separation from military service.

3.  On 12 July 1986, he underwent a medical/physical examination and was found fit for retention. 

4.  On 28 July 1986, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, for a personality disorder.  The commander's recommendation was based on the results of his psychiatric evaluation, the sudden downward trend in the applicant's job performance, and actions which indicated he could not be rehabilitated for productive military service. The applicant was counseled and advised of the basis for the separation action and the rights available to him.

5.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 1 August 1986 and directed issuance of an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

6.  Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 7 August 1986 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), paragraph 5-13, for a personality disorder.  He completed 5 years, 7 months, and 27 days of active service.

7.  The applicant applied to this Board requesting to be restored to active duty with credit for time lost as a result of his discharge, promotion to the next higher grade, a change of his reentry eligibility code and all back pay and allowances.  The Board denied his request on 15 January 1997.  He applied to the Board for reconsideration and on 4 March 1999 his request was administratively denied.

8.  He applied to the Board for a change of the narrative reason for his discharge to a more favorable reason.  On 17 November 2011, the Board determined there was no evidence in his records to show he was diagnosed with a personality disorder.  He was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, which does not qualify as a personality disorder within the meaning of the applicable regulations.  Based on the Board's recommendation he was issued a new DD Form 214 showing he was discharged under the authority of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-3, Secretarial Authority, with a separation code of "JFF."
 
9.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13 provides the criteria for discharge because of a personality disorder.  It states a Soldier may be separated for personality disorders that interfere with assignment to or performance of duty.  The diagnosis of a personality disorder must have been established by a physician trained in psychiatry and psychiatric diagnosis.  Separation because of a 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.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-17, currently in effect, provides for the separation of Soldiers who have a physical or mental condition that potentially interferes with assignment to or performance of duty; however, the physical or mental condition does not amount to a disability or qualify for disability processing under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation).  Paragraph 5-17 was not in effect at the time of the applicant’s discharge.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, in effect at the time, established policy and provided guidance for eliminating enlisted personnel for unsatisfactory performance and who were unsuitable for further military service.  An individual could be separated for unsatisfactory performance if it was determined that the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.  A discharge under honorable conditions was normally considered appropriate.

12.  Army Regulation 15-185 governs operations of the ABCMR.  Paragraph 2-11 of this regulation states that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR.  The regulation provides that the Director of the ABCMR or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing before which the applicant, counsel, and witnesses may appear whenever justice requires. 
 
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was initially discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, for a personality disorder, without evidence in the available records to show he was in fact diagnosed with a personality disorder.  However, he was diagnosed as having an adjustment disorder.  Based on the Board's recommendation he was issued a new DD Form 214 showing he was discharged under the authority of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-3, Secretarial Authority.

2.  In spite of evidence indicating the reason for his separation as initially shown on his DD Form 214 was in error, a valid reason for his discharge existed at the time of his separation proceedings.  Therefore, even though his reason for discharge was changed by the Board, it doesn't change the fact that he should have been discharged.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's 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)                                         AR20120004394



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120004394



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1