IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  1 March 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100021956 


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 correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to change her separation processing designator (SPD) code from JFK [it is believed she meant to indicate JFX as shown on her DD Form 214] to JDM or JDR.

2.  The applicant states she needs the SPD code changed because it is hurting her advantage in obtaining employment with several Federal agencies.  She further contends that the record is in error because the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has awarded her a physical disability due to post traumatic stress disorder, rated at 70 percent disabling.  She contends she does not have a personality disorder.

3.  The applicant provides a quotation from a news article on Yahoo.com.  She also provides two letters addressed to her from the VA, dated 22 March 2002 and 1 February 2010.

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.  On 11 February 1999, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army.  She completed her initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty 77W (Water Treatment Specialist).

3.  On 1 November 1999, the applicant was advanced to private first class, pay grade E-3.

4.  The specific facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge are not in the available records.

5.  On 24 September 2000, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, due to a personality disorder.  She had completed 1 year, 7 months, and 14 days of creditable actively duty service.

6.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows she was given an SPD code of JFX.  Her service was characterized as honorable.

7.  On 7 December 2005, the Army Discharge Review Board considered the applicant's request to change the reason for her discharge.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that the command's action was erroneous.  Accordingly, the ADRB concluded that the reason for the applicant's discharge was both proper and equitable.  The ADRB denied her request.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 states that a Soldier may be separated for a personality disorder, not amounting to a disability under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40, that interferes with assignment or duty performance.

9.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities and reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214.

	a.  The SPD code of JFX was the appropriate code for the applicant based upon the guidance provided in Army Regulation 635-5-1 for Soldiers separating under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, for a personality disorder.

	b.  JDM and JDR, referred to by the applicant, are not listed in this regulation as valid SPD codes.

10.  Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR)) paragraph 2-9 provides that the Board begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.

11.  The applicant provides the following quotation from a news article she attributes to Yahoo.com: "Unlike PTSD, which the Army regards as a treatable mental disability caused by the acute stresses of war, the military designation of personality disorder can have devastating consequences for soldiers.  Defined as a deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior, a personality disorder is considered a pre-existing condition that relieves the military of its duty to pay for the person's health care or combat-related disability pay.  But after an article in The Nation magazine exposed the practice, the Defense Department changed its policy and began requiring a top-level review of each case to ensure post-traumatic stress or a brain injury wasn't the underlying cause.  After that, the annual number of personality disorder cases dropped by 75 percent.  Only      260 soldiers were discharged on those grounds in 2009."

12.  The letters provided by the applicant from the VA dated:

	a.  22 March 2002 indicates she was awarded service connected compensation effective 1 October 2000, but the specific reasons for the compensation are not stated in the document; and

	b.  1 February 2010 indicates that her disability rating was increased from 
50 to 70 percent effective 1 August 2009.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that her DD Form 214 should be corrected to show an SPD code of JDM or JDR because she does not have a personality disorder.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was discharged due to a personality disorder, denoted by an SPD code of JFX.  The applicant has not provided any documentary evidence showing that this action was done in error or is unjust.  Furthermore, the applicant has requested a change of this SPD code to one of two other codes which are not listed in the governing regulation as valid codes.

3.  While the VA letters provided by the applicant clearly show she was rated with a service connected disability, they do not provide any information as to the nature of her disabilities. 

4.  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)                                         AR20100021956





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100021956



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1