IN THE CASE OF

		BOARD DATE:	  17 January 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120011582 


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, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show his narrative reason for separation as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) vice personality disorder.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) discovered his personality disorder was due to PTSD.  His PTSD negatively impacted his ability to properly function as a Soldier, recruiter, and mechanic.

3.  The applicant provides:

* Memorandum for Physical Examination, dated 19 April 2007
* Excerpt of a letter from the VA, undated
* Letter from his spouse, dated 20 May 2012

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.  After having had previous enlisted service, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 April 2002 and held military occupational specialty 63B (Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic).  The highest rank/grade he attained while serving on active duty was sergeant/E-5.

3.  His record contains a report of mental status evaluation, dated 3 May 2007, showing he received a mental status evaluation due to a personality disorder.  The medical officer indicated:

   a.  his mood was normal, he was fully alert, he was fully oriented, his mood or affect was unremarkable, his thinking process was clear, his thought content normal, his memory was good, he possessed the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, and he was mentally responsible.  The medical examiner determined he met medical retention standards and did not require a medical evaluation board.

	b.  he had seen the applicant on 5 April 2007, 16 April 2007, and 1 May 2007 for a comprehensive evaluation and medical therapy session.  The applicant’s command had directed the evaluation.  The applicant had been made aware of the purpose of the evaluation, including the inherent limits of confidentiality, and agreed to participate.

	c.  the primary diagnosis was a personality disorder not otherwise specified (NOS).  The diagnosis was representative of a personality order in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), Army Regulation 635-200, and the 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM IV-TR).  This disorder results in interpersonal and occupational problems that interfered with his ability to perform his duty.  This diagnosis was established by longitudinal evidence of cyclical maladaptive patterns of behavior including unstable relationships and self-image, impulsivity, affective instability, and recurrent suicidal ideation.

	d.  his condition and the problems he presented with were not, in the opinion of the medical examiner, amenable to hospitalization, short-term treatment, 


rehabilitative transfer, training, or reclassification to another type of duty within the military.  The medical examiner opined it was unlikely that efforts to rehabilitate or develop the applicant further into a satisfactory member of the military would be successful.  Separation under the provisions of chapter 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 was considered to be in the best interest of the individual and the Army.

4.  On 18 May 2007, he received a complete medical examination/physical in preparation for his pending chapter/separation proceedings.  These medical records show he claimed he was suffering from PTSD and that he had been receiving some sort of treatment for PTSD.  It does not appear that the diagnosis or treatment of PTSD was rendered by a military medical officer or facility.  The examining medical officer found him medically qualified for military service.

5.  On 8 August 2007, his immediate commander notified him that he was initiating a separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations), chapter 5-13 due to his personality disorder.  The commander stated he was initiating the separation action because the applicant had displayed signs and symptoms of a personality disorder and had been attending mental health since 7 March 2006 for his diagnosis of PTSD.  

   a.  The applicant attended an emergency session at behavioral health.  His condition was so severe he had to be evacuated to the hospital for 12 days because he felt he was a danger to others.  A medical officer (psychiatrist) diagnosed him with a personality disorder.  According to the medical examiner it was unlikely any rehabilitation effort would be successful.  The medical examiner further recommended the applicant be discharged in accordance with chapter    5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200.  His commander recommended he receive an honorable discharge and advised him of his rights.

	b.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of his commander's notification on 
10 August 2007.

6.  The separation authority approved the proposed separation action against the applicant in accordance with paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 and directed he receive an honorable character of service.  On 2 October 2007, the applicant was accordingly discharged.  His DD Form 214 shows he completed 5 years, 5 months, and 3 days of creditable active service during this period.  This form further shows the following entries:

* item 25 shows the entry "Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13"


* item 26 shows the entry "JFX"
* item 28 shows the entry "Personality Disorder"

7.  He provided a letter from his wife, dated 20 May 2012.  This letter describes the difficulties he and his family faced after he deployed to Kuwait in 2003.  These difficulties include trouble sleeping and difficulties related to coping with the stresses of military life.  

8.  He provided an excerpt from a letter he received from the VA.  This letter shows the VA granted him a 30-percent service connected disability for PTSD effective 3 October 2007.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides for separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 provides the criteria for discharge because of a personality disorder.  It states that a Soldier may be separated for personality disorders, not amounting to disability under Army Regulation 635-40, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty.  The diagnosis of a personality disorder must have been established by a physician trained in psychiatry and psychiatric diagnosis.  Separation because of a personality disorder is authorized only if the diagnosis concludes that the disorder is so severe that the Soldier's ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired.

10.  Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of a physical disability.  It provides that the mere presence of an impairment does not, of itself, justify a finding of unfitness because of physical disability.  

11.  Army Regulation 40-501 governs medical fitness standards for enlistment, induction, appointment (including officer procurement programs), retention, and separation (including retirement).  It outlines medical conditions which may render and individual unfit or which may preclude enlistment and notes that both personality and adjustment disorders will be dealt with through administrative and not medical channels.  Paragraph 3-35 of this regulation states that a history of or current manifestations of personality disorders render an individual administratively unfit.  These conditions render an individual administratively unfit rather than unfit because of physical illness or medical disability.  These conditions will be dealt with through administrative channels, including Army Regulation 635-200.

12.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) states that the SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations which 

identify reasons for and types of separation from active duty.  The SPD code JFX is the correct code for Soldiers separating under paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of a personality disorder.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation that determined he was diagnosed with a personality disorder by competent military medical authorities that affected his ability to function effectively in a military environment.  Accordingly, his chain of command initiated separation action against him under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200.  His discharge was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of his rights.

2.  He contends he was diagnosed by the VA with PTSD, which corresponds with his military medical documentation, which shows he claimed to have PTSD and to be receiving treatment for PTSD.  Notwithstanding the PTSD entry on his separation physical, the evidence of record shows the medical officer/psychiatrist who examined him diagnosed him with a personality disorder, not PTSD, as shown on his mental status evaluation.

3.  His administrative discharge under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 for a personality disorder was proper.  His discharge was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of his rights.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.  Therefore, there is no reason to correct his DD Form 214 as he has requested.

4.  In view of the circumstances in this case, there is insufficient evidence to grant the requested relief.  The applicant has not shown error, injustice, or inequity for the relief he requests.

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)                                         AR20120011582



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120011582



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1