IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  21 April 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100025917 


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 the separation authority, separation code, and narrative reason for separation be removed from her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

2.  The applicant states she was incorrectly discharged due to a personality disorder when, in fact, she should have been discharged due to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  She also states she just learned she has had PTSD for years and did not know it until she was diagnosed.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214.

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.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army in pay grade E-3 on 4 February 1987 for a period of 4 years and training as a psychiatric specialist.  She completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and was transferred to Fort Sam Houston, Texas, to undergo advanced individual training (AIT).  She failed to complete AIT as a psychiatric specialist and was transferred to another company to undergo training as a medical specialist.

3.  She completed training as a medical specialist and was transferred to Fort Devens, Massachusetts, for assignment to a combat support hospital.  It also appears that she got married either during AIT or shortly after her arrival at Fort Devens.

4.  On 13 May 1988, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against her for disobedience of a commissioned officer.

5.  The applicant also received counseling for poor military bearing, failing to repair, breaking quarters restrictions, and failing to report to sick call on time.

6.  On 21 June 1988, the applicant's commander notified her that he was initiating action to bar her from reenlistment based on her disciplinary record and failure to respond to numerous counseling sessions.  The applicant elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf.  The battalion commander approved the bar to reenlistment on 23 June 1988.

7.  On 16 December 1988, the applicant departed for assignment to Germany; however, the applicant did not want to go to Germany and was admitted to the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Brockton, West Roxbury, Massachusetts.  She was diagnosed as having an adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features and mixed personality with passive-aggressive and paranoid features.

8.  After 3 weeks in Germany, the applicant was admitted to the 130th Station Hospital on 18 January 1989 because of suicidal ideation.  The examining psychiatrist found the applicant demonstrated a persistent pattern of distrust of her superiors and the Army in general and that she had used medical facilities in the United States and in Germany to help resolve her ongoing interpersonal problems.  He diagnosed the applicant as having a mixed personality disorder with passive-aggressive and paranoid features and represented a personality disorder within the meaning of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-3rd Edition.

9.  On 17 April 1989, the applicant's commander notified her that he was initiating action to discharge her from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 
635-200, paragraph 5-13, due to a diagnosed personality disorder.

10.  After consulting with counsel the applicant elected not to submit a statement in her own behalf.

11.  On 18 April 1989, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, due to a personality disorder.

12.  On 24 May 1989, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, due to a personality disorder.  She was issued a separation code of "JFX" which indicates separation under paragraph 5-13 due to a personality disorder.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, provides the criteria for discharge because of a personality disorder.  It states that a Soldier may be separated for personality disorders that interfere with assignment to or performance of duty.  Personnel discharged by reason of a personality disorder under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 are issued a separation code of "JFX."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's administrative discharge was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of the applicant's rights.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons were appropriate under the circumstances.

2.  The applicant's contentions have been noted; however, she failed to show through the evidence submitted and the evidence of record that she was improperly diagnosed as having a personality disorder and that she was discharged under the wrong authority or for the wrong reason.

3.  The examining psychiatrist diagnosed her as having a personality disorder and cited the fact that she had also been previously diagnosed by the VA Medical Center for like reasons.  Therefore, given the available facts in this case, it would not be appropriate to attempt to second guess the psychiatrist who examined the applicant at the time and determined that the applicant exhibited the symptoms of a personality disorder.

4.  Additionally, the applicant was issued the proper separation code of "JFX" to denote separation by reason of a personality disorder and she has not shown any error or injustice in that issue. 

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 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)                                         AR20100025917



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100025917



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1