RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        5 DECEMBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060002334


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Rene’ R. Parker               |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Linda Simmons                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Patrick McGann                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Donald Steenfott              |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge be changed to a
medical retirement.

2.  The applicant states that he was not granted a Physical Evaluation
Board (PEB) even though he was an inpatient in five Army hospitals.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty), separation orders, Army Commendation Medal
Certificate, and medical records.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the United States Army for
a period of 4 years as an E-1 on 29 February 2000.  He was trained in,
awarded, and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Cannon
Crewmember). He was honorably discharged on 28 February 2004.

2.  On 4 June 2001, the applicant’s medical records show that while he was
deployed to Kosovo, he complained of having problems sleeping.  The medical
personnel noted that the applicant returned from Fire Base Thunder and
stated that the gunfire he heard caused him to reminisce about his wife and
weapons carried by the rebels.  He was also seen on 26 June 2001 for
insomnia and anxiety.

3.  On 10 November 2001, a psychiatrist progress note from the task force
psychiatrist indicated that the applicant had been seen at Combat Stress
Control since August 2001 for symptoms of anxiety, mild panic attacks, and
insomnia.  The psychiatrist said it was the applicant’s eighth and last
scheduled appointment before returning to the United States the following
week.  The psychiatrist stated that the applicant reported to him that he
was feeling more relaxed and sure of himself.  The applicant was less
anxious about danger or his duties in Kosovo since his deployment was
almost over.  The psychiatrist assessed the applicant with adjustment
disorder with anxious mood, in partial remission.  He recommended that the
applicant continue the medication prescribed and to follow-up with Fort
Stewart Division of Mental Health Activity (DMHA) upon his arrival.

4.  Records show that in 2002, the applicant was seen on a regular basis by
Fort Stewart DMHA for the symptoms listed above.  On several occasions, the
psychiatrist either recommended an increase in existing medications or
prescribed new medications.  On 23 February 2002, the psychiatrist wrote
that the applicant admitted to improvement of mood, sleeping, and anxiety
since increasing his dosage.  “Overall he is doing better.”  On a follow-up
medication evaluation on 5 August 2002, the psychiatrist wrote that the
applicant continued to have periods of anxiety especially when stressed.

5.  Medical records show that on 16 February 2003 while deployed in Kuwait,
the applicant's command was consulted concerning the applicant’s medical
problems and the commander confirmed the command's intent to discretely
restrict the applicant from pulling guard duty.  Additionally, the social
worker recommended that the applicant remain under his current restrictions
of no access to ammo and no guard duty pending further evaluation by the
division psychiatrist.

6.  On 23 February 2003, the division psychologist certified that the
applicant was evaluated on 19 and 23 February 2003 for complaints of
anxiety, including increased heart rate, increased worries, and difficulty
sleeping.  The psychologist stated that the test results were largely
invalid due to the applicant’s endorsement of too many infrequent items.
However, he stated that the applicant endorsed many items related to
psychotic experiences, difficulty thinking and posttraumatic stress.  The
psychologist found that the applicant was mentally sound to appreciate any
wrongfulness of his conduct and to conform
his conduct to the requirements of the law.  “He has the mental capacity to
understand and participate in any administrative proceedings.”  The
psychologist said, in his opinion, the condition presented by the applicant
was not amenable to treatment in the theater of operation.  He also said
that the applicant’s fitness for duty and suitability for continued service
was questionable pending further evaluation.  The psychologist recommended
that the applicant be evacuated to Germany for further psychiatric
evaluation and treatment.

7.  On 24 February 2003, the commander wrote a memorandum for record
explaining the release of the applicant from Kuwait.  The commander stated
that the applicant was diagnosed with a preexisting mental condition that
required further evaluation and treatment in Germany.  The commander stated
that the chain of command and the division mental health psychologist
recommended that the Soldier be evacuated for treatment for possible
schizophrenia and post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

8.  On 2 March 2003, the applicant was evaluated by Landstuhl Regional
Medical Center Inpatient Psychiatry due to paranoid thoughts and possible
delusions.  The applicant was diagnosed with psychotic disorder.  The
psychiatrist noted that the applicant had a history suggestive of declining
function over, at least, six months and was guarded and paranoid with
paranoid delusions and consistent hallucinations.  The applicant was also
diagnosed with symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, including
intrusive thoughts and flashbacks.  The applicant was manifested for Air
Evacuation to Walter Reed Army Medical Center for continued evaluation and
probable medical board.

9.  The applicant arrived at Walter Reed on 6 March 2003.  A narrative
summary of his history showed the applicant had intrusive thoughts,
flashbacks, and paranoid delusions for the past 2 years.  In the summary it
was stated that the applicant was serving as a sentry on border patrol in
Kosovo when he witnessed the shooting of a civilian automobile driver who
would not stop when instructed to by the gate guards.  On 17 March 2003,
the applicant was discharged from Walter Reed and air evacuated to Fort
Stewart, Georgia for further psychiatric evaluation and/or treatment.

10.  The applicant’s medical records contained an incomplete discharge
summary from Fort Stewart Army Community Hospital.  The discharge summary
shows that the applicant was admitted on 19 March 2003 and discharged on
 18 April 2003.  The summary provided the history of the applicant’s
present illness, developmental and family history, mental status at the
time of his admission, admission laboratories, physical examination,
diagnoses, and hospital course.  The summary stated that the applicant was
originally diagnosed with PTSD with paranoid schizophrenia which was
considered by the psychiatrist at Fort Stewart to be a factitious disorder.
 The psychiatrist explained that the applicant’s behavior in Kuwait was not
only disruptive, but also dangerous and it was felt that he was absolutely
not deployable and could not be retained in the Army because of the way he
processed stress.  The psychiatrist admitted that because of the diagnoses
of PTSD and schizophrenia originally given, a Medical Evaluation Board
(MEB) was contemplated, but in light of his behavior stemming from a
personality disorder, allowing the applicant to complete his enlistment was
contemplated along with the possibility of being processed for discharge
for reasons other than physical unfitness.

11.  The summary verified that the applicant’s medications were eventually
stopped cold and there was no observable change in his behavior.  The
psychiatrist stated that the applicant appeared to be doing better as he
was not as sedated and did not appear to have as much agitation, which may
have been coming from either the antidepressant, antipsychotic, or from
withdrawal from his other medications.  However, the applicant displayed no
suicidal ideation or behavior while on the ward and did not appear to be
responding to internal stimuli.  The psychiatrist said the applicant, very
innocently, presented a number of contrived symptoms which argued against
malingering and made the medical personnel hesitate to make that diagnosis.
 It is unknown what the final diagnosis and/or recommendations were since
the summary provided was incomplete.

12.  A supporting statement from a medical doctor from the Integrated
Behavioral Center, Savannah, Georgia dated 3 September 2003, stated that he
had been treating the applicant since May 2003.  He said it was his
professional opinion that the applicant should only work daytime hours and
not be allowed to carry a firearm at this time.  He explained that his
recommendations were due to the medications the applicant was taking at
night and his mental/nervous condition.

13.  The applicant’s Enlisted Record Brief (ERB) dated 3 November 2003
lists his physical profile as “111111” (no physical restrictions).  The ERB
also shows his date of rank to E-4 as 1 November 2003.

14.  Orders dated 20 November 2003, reassigned the applicant from Fort
Stewart Georgia to the U.S. Transition Point.  The orders stated that after
processing, the applicant was released from active duty not by reason of
physical disability, effective 28 February 2004.

15.  A physical examination, dated 28 January 2004, shows that the
applicant received a physical prior to his discharge form the military.
This form shows that the applicant’s physical profile contained all “1s”
which indicated that there were no assignment limitations placed on his
military duties.  Additionally, the physician conducting the physical
examination checked the block that stated “applicant is qualified for ETS
(discharge).”

16.  The certificate dated 5 March 2004 shows that the applicant was
awarded the Army Commendation Medal during the period 7 October 2000 to 30
January 2004 for meritorious service during Operation Enduring Freedom and
Operation Iraqi Freedom.

17.  Medical records, dated after the applicant’s discharge from the
military, verify that he continued to seek psychiatric care through the
Department Veterans Affairs (VA).  A letter, dated 2 April 2004, stated
that the applicant was admitted on 15 March 2004 and was an inpatient at
the West Haven VA Medical Center.  The staff psychiatrist said that the
applicant was suffering from schizophrenia and PTSD.

18.  Army Regulation 635-40, (Physical Evaluation for Retention,
Retirement, or Separation) states that disability compensation is not an
entitlement acquired by reason of service-incurred illness or injury;
rather, it is provided to Soldiers whose service interrupted and they can
no longer continue to reasonably perform because of a physical disability
incurred or aggravated in service.  When a Soldier is being processed for
separation for reasons other than physical disability, continued
performance of assigned duty commensurate with his or her rank or grade
until Soldier is scheduled for separation, is an indication that the
individual is fit.

19.  Additionally, paragraph 4-8 states that when a commander believes that
a Soldier of his or her command is unable to perform the duties of his or
her office, grade, rank, or rating because of physical disability, the
commander will refer the Soldier to the responsible MTF for evaluation.
The request for evaluation will be in writing and will state the
commander's reasons for believing that the soldier is unable to perform his
or her duties. DD Form 689 (Individual Sick Slip) may be used for such
referral.

20.  Army Regulation 40-501 (Standard of Medical Fitness) provide medical
fitness standards for retention, separation and retirement.  The regulation
states, in pertinent part, that four numerical designations are used to
reflect different levels of functional capacity in the physical profile
serial system (PULHES).  The “S” in PULHES represents the “Psychiatric.
This factor concerns personality, emotional stability, and psychiatric
disease.  An individual having a numerical designation of “1” under all
factors is considered to possess a high level of medical fitness.

21.  Title 38, United States Code, sections 1110 and 1131, permits the VA
to award compensation for a medical condition which was incurred in or
aggravated by active military service.  The VA, however, is not required by
law to determine medical unfitness for further military service.  The VA,
in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation
solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical
condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the
individual concerned.  Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an
individual's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting
for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or
retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for VA benefits
based on an evaluation by that agency.

22.  Army Regulation 40-501, paragraph 3-35, personality, sexual or
factitious disorders; disorders of impulse control not elsewhere
classified, and psychoactive disorders, may render an individual
administratively unfit rather than unfit because of physical disability.
Interference with performance of effective duty in association with these
conditions will be dealt with through appropriate administrative channels.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s medical records document his mental health issues as
early as June 2001.  He was seen by several military hospitals in the
mental health department, medically evacuated, hospitalized in Germany at
Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Water Reed, and finally for 30 days at
Fort Stewart Army Community Hospital.  The applicant was originally
diagnosed with schizophrenia and PTSD.  However, during his 30 day
hospitalization at Fort Stewart, the psychiatrist reassessed the original
diagnosis and offered that the applicant’s behavior stemmed from a
personality disorder and not PTSD or schizophrenia.

2.  Additionally, the psychiatrist at Fort Stewart stated that a MEB was
originally contemplated because of the applicant’s diagnosis but, in light
of his new assessment, allowing the applicant to simply complete his
enlistment or to discharge him for reason other than physical unfitness was
considered an option.

3.  Evidence of record further shows that in spite of the applicant’s
medical history he did not receive a profile concerning his medical issues.
 His records show that his medical problems did not interfere with his
performance of duty as demonstrated by his promotion to E4 in November 2003
and his award of the Army Commendation Medal in March 2004.  There is no
medical evidence, and the applicant did not provide any, that showed he was
medically unfit and required physical disability processing.

4.  No medical evidence has been presented by the applicant to demonstrate
an injustice in the medical treatment received in service.  Absent evidence
to the contrary, the applicant was physically fit at the time of his
discharge on
28 February 2004.  He has provided no evidence to indicate otherwise.
Consequently, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request to
correct his records to show that he was discharged for medical reasons.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__LS  ___  ___PM __  __DS___  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.




                                  _____Linda Simmons________
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060002334                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061205                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |108.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]