| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Allen L. Raub | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughnessy, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her records be corrected to show the reason for her discharge as major depressive disorder rather than personality disorder.
APPLICANT STATES: That prior to her depression episode she never suffered from a mental illness and never had social problems. The VA found her disabled on the basis of major depressive disorder. After about ten months of treatment, she was informed that there was never any evidence of a personality disorder. She provides her service medical records, her VA medical records, and a statement from her doctors dated 14 June 2001 as supporting evidence.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military personnel records are not available. The information contained herein was obtained from alternate sources.
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 June 1995. She completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 91B (Medical Specialist).
The applicant completed a separation physical on 15 February 2000. Her Report of Medical History, SF 93, item 13 indicates that she was treated in December 1999 for depression and personality disorder. Item 25 indicates that she attempted suicide four times in 1999 and had been treated for depression and related problems.
The applicant’s discharge packet is not available.
On 17 March 2000, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, personality disorder.
The available service medical records show that the applicant was treated, mostly for knee problems and gynecological problems, numerous times but not for either depression or for a personality disorder.
In August 2000, the VA awarded the applicant a 30 percent disability rating for major depressive disorder.
The 14 June 2001 letter provided by the applicant states that she had been receiving treatment for a major depressive disorder for the last 12 months at the James A. Haley VA Hospital. The attending physicians had never seen any evidence to support the diagnosis of a personality disorder in the applicant. No pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects and no marked impulsivity had been noted at any time during her treatment at that facility.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-13 sets the policy and prescribes procedures for separating members with a personality disorder (not amounting to a disability) that interfere with assignment to or performance of duty when so diagnosed by a physician trained in psychiatry and psychiatric diagnosis.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
2. The Board notes that the 14 June 2001 letter provided by the applicant states that she had been receiving treatment for a major depressive disorder for the last 12 months and the attending physicians had never seen any evidence to support the diagnosis of a personality disorder in the applicant. However, a discharge for personality disorder required that a military psychiatrist examine and diagnose the applicant with a personality disorder. In the absence of evidence to show that this diagnosis, made at the time of her separation, was in error the Board presumes that the correct diagnosis was made by competent medical personnel.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__slp___ __alr___ __teo___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001060129 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011023 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.02 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00293
The informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated the mood disorder (major depression, without psychotic features) due to multiple medical conditions as the single unfitting condition, rated 10%; with application of the SECNAVINST 1850.4E and DoDI 1332.39. The Veterans’ Affairs (VA), however, can rate and compensate all service connected conditions without regard to their impact on performance of military duties, including conditions developing after separation that are direct complications of a service...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020668
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, correction of her records to show she had the condition of major depressive disorder at the time of her discharge in 2003. e. The applicant has provided insufficient evidence that the condition of depressive disorder was unfitting at the time of her separation from the military in 2003.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050014561C070206
The applicant requests, in effect, that her medical records be corrected to show her diagnosis as major depressive disorder rather than paranoid schizophrenia. The applicant provided a DA Form 4187, dated 15 December 2000, that shows she requested enlistment in the Regular Army. It is also noted, however, that in October 1999 the applicant indicated she was under psychiatric supervision and requested a medical discharge.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00491
The Informal PEB determined she was unfit for continued Naval service and she was then separated with a 10% disability for Dystonia using the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Ratings Disabilities (VASRD) and applicable Service and Department of Defense regulations. Because my playing problem was NOT diagnosed correctly (musician's dystonia), I continued to blame myself for my inability to play the flute. The Navy PEB that determined the CI was unfit secondary to dystonia, did not address the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04102423C070208
The applicant states that she feels that she was “unjustly discharged.” She states that she went through “a Medical Board for approximately two years” and that she has a diagnosis of “Somatoform Disorder” and, at the time she submitted her application, was scheduled to be discharged without benefits. The service member reported that the only reason she stayed in the Army was she wanted the Army to take care of her medical conditions before she got out. In response to her rebuttal, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025643
The applicant states she presented evidence to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) of a diagnosis of PTSD but they refused to look at it. There is no follow-up treatment record for these conditions in the available records. Statements provided in support of the applicant's DVA application for PTSD state that the applicant's unit was on a humanitarian mission in El Salvador.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01313
Sarcoidosis 2. A 10% disability rating was assigned based on the 9434 code and a“mild social and industrial impairment.”The CI appealed and both a FPEB and USAPDA affirmed the 10% disability rating.In December 2001, the VA determined that both sarcoidosis and depression had EPTS and neither had been aggravated by service. SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for AR20130012146 (PD201201313)I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085559C070212
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that contrary to the Board’s original Memorandum of Consideration, he was not given any mental status evaluations in the year 2000, “let alone March 6 th 2000” as the Board noted. As noted in the Board’s previous action, the applicant’s commander initiated actions to administratively separate the applicant from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13 (personality disorder) on 28 March 2000. The Board notes that the December...
NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-00483
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEWDECISIONAL DOCUMENT ex-SA, USN Docket No. ND02-00483 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020305, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable and the reason for the discharge be changed to MEDICAL RETIREMENT. Since being discharged from the psychiatric unit the patient (Applicant) has been staying at TPU awaiting administrative separation.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01187
It is limited to those conditions determined by the PEB to be unfitting for continued military service and those conditions identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB when specifically requested by the CI. She was placed on medications and was able to function well. The majority agreed that the evidence did not warrant application of VASRD §4.129.The Board then determined the most appropriate fit with VASRD §4.130 criteria, its permanent rating recommendation at the time of...