IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  30 May 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120014808 


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, that the narrative reason for separation be changed from personality disorder to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  

2.  The applicant states he was discharged from the Army based on a personality disorder when in fact he was suffering from PTSD.  

3.  The applicant provides a DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States) with a counsel brief and the documents identified therein in support of his request.  

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

1.  Counsel requests, in effect, that the narrative reason for the applicant's discharge be changed from personality disorder to PTSD.  

2.  Counsel states the overwhelming amount of evidence points to the fact the applicant was suffering from PTSD and this ultimately led to his discharge from the Army.  

3.  Counsel provides a six-page statement and the 17 documents identified on the attached list of enclosures in support of this request.  


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's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 March 2002.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 92F (Petroleum Supply Specialist) and specialist/E-4 is the highest rank he held on active duty.  

3.  The applicant underwent mental status evaluations on 24 May, 14 September, 22 November, and 21 December 2004.  The last evaluation was completed by the Division Psychiatrist who diagnosed the applicant with a depressive disorder, recurrent, moderate and dependent personality disorder with borderline traits.  He confirmed the applicant met medical retention requirements and was mentally responsible.  He finally recommended the applicant's administrative separation. 

4.  On 31 January 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant action was being initiated to separate him under the provisions of paragraph 5-13, Army Regulation 635-200 because of personality disorder.   

5.  On 31 January 2005, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation and of the rights available to him in connection with the action.  Subsequent to receiving legal counsel, the applicant elected not to submit statements in his own behalf. 

6.  On 25 February 2005, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of paragraph 5-13, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of Personality Disorder and directed the applicant be issued an honorable discharge certificate.  On 5 March 2005, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  



7.  In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG), Director of Health Care Delivery.  This official states that while the final mental status evaluation contained a depressive order diagnosis that could have constituted a condition requiring a referral to a medical evaluation board if the symptoms were the primary reason for the applicant's difficulty in functioning.  However, this official confirms there is insufficient information and/or records available to support a conclusion the applicant suffered from PTSD or to support or counter the personality disorder diagnoses of the applicant at the time, or to know if a medical evaluation board would have been indicated at the time of his discharge. 

8.  On 1 May 2013, the applicant was provided a copy of the OTSG advisory opinion in order to have the opportunity to respond to or rebut its contents.  To date, he has failed to reply.   

9.  The applicant and counsel provide a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rating decision, dated 26 September 2011, which granted service connection and a 10 percent disability rating for PTSD, and a combined disability rating of 
30 percent for anxiety and PTSD, effective 25 May 2011. 

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) prescribes the policy for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 provides for separating members by reason of personality disorder (not amounting to disability) that interferes with assignment or with performance of duty.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request to change the narrative reason for separation has been carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.  

2.  The applicant's separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 
 
3.  The evidence of record contains multiple mental status evaluations completed on the applicant that confirmed a diagnosis of personality disorder not amounting to disability was made by proper medical authority.  The record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from an unfitting PTSD condition at the time of his discharge.  As confirmed by the OTSG advisory opinion, there is insufficient medical evidence to support an unfitting PTSD finding at the time of discharge.  
4.  In view of the foregoing, absent any evidence of error or injustice in the separation process or medical evidence confirming the applicant was suffering from an unfitting PTSD condition at the time of his discharge, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.     

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)                                         AR20120014808





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120014808



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1