BOARD DATE:	  4 August 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140018933 


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, the widow of a former service member (FSM), requests reconsideration of her previous request that her deceased spouse's discharge be changed to a medical discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, in her previous request she was granted partial relief and she is now providing a new argument and new evidence that was not previously considered.

3.  The applicant provides the following related to the FSM:

* Certificate of Death
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) Discharge)
* Standard Form (SF) 88 (Report of Medical Examination)
* DD Form 47 (Record of Induction)
* DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record)
* page 2 of DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract- Armed Forces of the United States)
* memorandum, subject:  Request for Prior Service Records
* Personnel Records Action Slip
* Texas Department of Public Safety Identification (ID) Card
* Medicare Health Insurance ID Card
* letter from the Social Security Administration
* Ophthalmological Consultative Examination Report
* Case Assessment Form
* Patient Administrative Record (Proposed)
* DA Form 2170 (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status)
* a page titled Section XVI. Psychoses, Psychoneuroses, and Personality Disorders
* Department of Veterans Administration (VA) Form 10-10m (Medical Certificate)
* SF 519 (Radiographic Reports)
* VA Form 10-1000 (Hospital Summary)
* four pages of medical records from the VA Medical Center, Houston, TX, dated between 8 and 12 April 2010
* 10 pages of medical records from the Cypress Fairbanks Medical Center, Houston, TX, records, dated between 15 June and 3 July 2011
* two pages of Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings, Docket Number AR20130016778, dated 13 May 2014
* Columbus Public Schools Academic Record
* three pages titled Treatment Recommended:  Continued Ophthalmological Care
* five letters, dated between 26 June 1972 and 14 May 2014
* five pages of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness)
* three pages of Army Regulation 601-207 (Military Entrance Processing Station)  
* an article titled Oral Health and the General Health Implications
* an article titled Genetic Dental Abnormalities:  Types and Symptoms

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20130016778, on 13 May 2014.

2.  As a new argument, the applicant states the FSM was diagnosed with dental defects at Brook General Hospital (BGH), San Antonio, TX, and they had controlling influence on his severe psychiatric disorder.  The SF 88, dated 4 May 1971, shows he had abnormalities of the mouth and throat.  She is providing information that states symptoms and complications of genetic abnormalities are an early risk for psychiatric disorders.  This information should remove all doubt that the alleged psychosis was caused/aggravated by the dental procedure on 4 May 1971 without the proper medical follow-up.  A disability is any physical or mental impairment that limits a major activity.

3.  As new evidence, the applicant provides an article titled Treatments for Genetic Dental Abnormalities, undated, authored by N____ R____, wherein, in part, it stated that symptoms and complications of genetic abnormalities affecting dentition and oral tissues range from mild to severe and even can be life threatening.  People with certain genetic oral/dental abnormalities are at risk for early death, cancer, and psychiatric disorders.  Therefore, seeking evaluation and treatment at the first signs or indication of a genetic oral/dental abnormality is important.

4.  The FSM was inducted into the Army of the United States on 19 June 1969 and he held military occupational specialty (MOS) 94B (Cook).  He was promoted to the rank/grade of specialist four (SP4)/E-4 on 17 July 1970.

5.  On 4 May 1971, the FMS underwent a medical examination at BGH, San Antonio.  The SF 88, dated 4 May 1971, shows the examining physician noted the FSM had the dental defects of “T-3” and “C-12.”  Item 30 (Notes and Significant or Interval History) of this form is blank and he was found qualified for separation.  His PULHES was 1-1-1-1-1-1.  He was honorably released from active duty on 18 June 1971 and he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve.  

6.  The FSM enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 September 1971 in the rank of SP4 and MOS 94B.  On 8 November 1971, he was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC), 4th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, Panama.

7.  Due to subsequent problems related to his overindulgence in alcohol and issues with his spouse, he was enrolled in a 25-day program at a halfway house in Panama for alcohol abuse.  His record contains several counseling statements that show he was counseled on:

* 10 April 1972, for threatening to kill his spouse and he was told to control his drinking
* 18 May 1972, for physically threatening a Soldier at the halfway house
* 22 May 1972, for being discharged from the halfway house due to his failure to cooperate

8.  On 23 May 1972, he underwent a mental status evaluation directed by his commander as he was being considered for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 (Personnel Separations – Discharge – Unfitness and Unsuitability) for unsuitability.  The examining social worker stated, in part:

   a.  The FSM had relationship problems.  He was involved in three incidents involving a pistol being drawn on him, he threatened to physically harm two staff members at the halfway house, and he physically harmed a member over a minor disagreement.
   b.  The FSM had been hospitalized at the halfway house on two occasions and consistently failed to respond positively to numerous attempts at individual and family psychotherapy.  
   
   c.  He was diagnosed with a personality disorder with a secondary diagnosis of an alcohol and drug abuse and exhibited poor potential for rehabilitation.  Due to the severity of his psychiatric disorder which existed prior to service (EPTS), and the FSM's lack of positive response to 25 days of treatment, it was strongly recommended he be discharged from service.   

9.  He was subsequently counseled on:

* 25 May 1972, for swearing, not cleaning up the mess he made, and throwing pot holders
* 1 June 1972, for assaulting a Soldier at the movie theater
* 5 June 1972, for being late to duty, his temper, and substandard personal hygiene  
* 12 June 1972, for repeatedly creating problems, refusing to follow instructions, threatening other cooks, substandard hygiene habits, and his negative attitude
* 19 June 1972, for being involved with the military police (MPs) concerning his marital problems

10.  On 21 June 1972, he was notified by his immediate commander that he was recommending him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-212 based on his unsuitability for Army duty.

11.  The FSM consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, its effects, and of the procedures and rights available to him.  The FSM waived consideration of his case and a personal appearance before a board of officers, indicated that he would not be submitting a statement in his behalf, and waived representation by appointed counsel.  He acknowledged he understood that as the result of issuance of an undesirable discharge under conditions other than honorable, he may be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws, and that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.

12.  On 22 June 1972, his immediate commander recommended the FSM's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unsuitability.  The commander stated this was based on the FSM's performance and attitude due to character and behavior disorders which made it extremely difficult for him to rehabilitate and conform to the standards of a satisfactory Soldier.

13.  On 3 July 1972, he underwent a medical examination.  The SF 88, dated 3 July 1972, shows the examining physician did not note that the FSM had any medical or dental defects and he was found qualified for separation.  His PULHES was 1-1-1-1-1-1.

14.  On 12 July 1972, the separation authority approved the FSM's discharge for unsuitability and directed he be issued a General Discharge Certificate.  On 25 July 1972, he was discharged accordingly. 

15.  The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) he was issued for this period of service shows he was discharged in the rank of SP4 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212, by reason of unsuitability - character or behavior disorder (separation program number (SPN) 264) with an under honorable conditions (general) characterization of service.  

16.  There is no evidence in the FSM's record that shows while serving on active duty he was treated for, or diagnosed with, any mental/medical condition/disorder that permanently prevented him from performing his assigned duties, was found to be unfitting, or required referral to a medical evaluation board (MEB).  There is no evidence that shows he ever received a permanent profile of “3” that would require referral to an MEB. 

17.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, established the policy and provided procedures and guidance for the prompt elimination of enlisted personnel who were determined to be unsuitable for further military service due to inaptitude, character and behavior disorders, apathy, enuresis, alcoholism, and homosexuality.  An individual would normally be issued an honorable or a general discharge, as warranted by the individual's military record.

18.  The FSM died on 17 June 2012, of coronary artery disease, renal failure, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia.

19.  The applicant had previously provided a VA Rating Decision, dated 19 February 2014, wherein it stated that service-connection for cause of death remained denied.  The FSM had not been rated as service-connected for any medical conditions during his lifetime.

20.  On 13 May 2014, the ABCMR found there was no basis to grant the applicant's request to change the FSM's discharge to a medical discharge.  However, based on changes to Army Regulation 635-212 that stated, in part, service members diagnosed with a personality disorder and separated for unsuitability may be granted an honorable discharge, the applicant was granted partial relief and the FSM's discharge was upgraded to an honorable discharge.  
21.  The FSM's DD Form 214 for the period ending 25 July 1972 was voided and on 2 July 2014 a new DD Form 214 was issued that shows he was honorably discharged.

22.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) establishes the Army Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) and sets forth policies, responsibilities, and procedures that apply in determining whether a Soldier is unfit because of physical disability to reasonably perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating.  It provides for medical evaluation boards, which are convened to document a Soldier's medical status and duty limitations insofar as duty is affected by the Soldier's status.  A decision is made as to the Soldier's medical qualifications for retention based on the criteria prescribed in Army Regulation 40-501.

23.  Army Regulation 40-501 states in pertinent part that personality disorders render an individual administratively unfit rather than unfit because of physical illness or medical disability and will be dealt with through administrative channels (emphasis added).

24.  Army Regulation 635-40 further states the mere presence of impairment does not, of itself, justify a finding of unfitness because of physical disability.  In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature/degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the member reasonably may be expected to perform because of his or her office, rank, grade, or rating.  The Army must find that a service member is physically unfit to reasonably perform his or her duties and assign an appropriate disability rating before that service member can be medically separated or retired.

25.  The Army physical profile serial system is based primarily upon the function of body systems and their relation to military duties.  The functions of the various organs, systems, and integral parts of the body are considered.  An individual having a numeric designation of “1” under all factors is considered to possess a high level of medical fitness.  A profile containing one or more numerical designations of “3” signifies the individual has one or more medical condition that may require significant limitations.  A permanent profile of “3” would require referral to an MEB.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

The evidence of record does not show and the applicant has not provided any new evidence that shows the FSM was diagnosed with or suffered from any medical condition while serving on active duty that limited his ability to perform in his grade/MOS, that would have warranted referral to an MEB, or would have required processing for a medical discharge.  His general discharge was appropriately ungraded to an honorable discharge on 13 May 2014 based on his diagnosis of a personality disorder.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the requested relief.

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20130016778, dated 13 May 2014.



      _______ _  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)                                         AR20140018933





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140018933



7


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1