IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    8 August 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130006891 


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 narrative reason for separation be changed from personality disorder to something else. 

2.  The applicant states he has seen a number of psychiatrists in the Department of Veterans Affairs and in the civilian sector.  They all said the same thing, that he does not have a personality disorder. 

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* 2013 Psychological Evaluation

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 30 December 2004 and he held military occupational specialty 19K (M-1 Armor Crewmember).  He served in Iraq from 6 October 2006 to 15 February 2007. 

3.  His Report of Mental Status Evaluation is not available for review with this case.  

4.  On 9 April 2007, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of paragraph 5-13, Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) because of a personality disorder.  He stated that the applicant had been diagnosed with a passive aggressive personality disorder and had represented a command liability and impaired the unit overall readiness and functioning. 

5.  On 10 April 2007, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of separation action and he 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.  Subsequent to this acknowledgement, the immediate commander initiated separation action against the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, by reason of personality disorder.  His intermediate commander recommended approval. 

7.  On 11 April 2007, 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 characterization of service.  On 19 April 2007, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  

8.  His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of "Personality Disorder" with an honorable character of service.  He completed 2 years, 3 months, and 20 days of active service.  He was assigned a separation code "JFX." 

9.  In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained on 8 July 2013 from the Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG), Director of Health Care Delivery.  The OTSG official states that the conclusions for this advisory opinion were drawn solely based on available documentation from his time in active service unless otherwise noted.

	a.  In January 2006, the applicant was referred to Behavioral Health as a result of his post-deployment health reassessment, not available for review, and seen by a mental health technician.  He described feeling upset by problems with his supervisor and in his personal life and with difficulties making new friends. Depressive symptoms were noted, with chronic depression noted though without time frame.  Seen again almost 2 weeks later, his depressive symptoms continued and he reported at times re-experiencing traumatic events prior to service, though the frequency was not noted.  The time frame of his symptoms was again not noted, and the diagnosis deferred again with a rule out of Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood.  On his third visit with the mental health technician, the applicant expressed having anxiety in the form of worrying about his future performance as a Soldier.  With reminders of past abuse and traumatic experiences as a fire fighter, he was referred for Eye Movement Rapid Desensitization (EMDR) Therapy.  His first EMDR session consisted of an assessment, during which he disclosed a history of fighting in school and various illegal behaviors during high school, to include an arrest after high school with charges dropped.  The applicant also disclosed a history of suicide attempts, at ages 8 or 9 by starting to cut his wrist, 10 or 11 by hanging, and 20 by gunshot. Each time he was stopped by his best friend, according to his report.  The social worker diagnosed him with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood, judged to be acute by the reviewer.  She also diagnosed him with Antisocial Personality Disorder, though while he may have had traits, the record does not support full criteria meeting the diagnosis.

	b.  The applicant attended one EMDR session and then was not seen again until eight months later in October, just prior to deployment.  He did not want to deploy because he had recently married a woman with four children and did not want to be away from his family.  He was cleared for deployment and deployed. At the end of January, back on Rest and Recuperation, he again sought out behavioral health assistance and as a walk-in, reported feeling depressed and having suicidal ideation with a plan.  He was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed mood and psychiatrically hospitalized.  Since he had not been in therapy since February of the previous year, it was likely his previous adjustment disorder resolved and this was a new acute episode related to separation from his family.  No records were available from his inpatient stay.  Following discharge, his record reflected a pending chapter 5-17 administrative separation, presumably generated by a provider during his inpatient stay.  The provider noted a history of self-mutilation in the form of cutting; however, no details were given, so it is unclear whether this was a repeated behavior or the suicide attempt referenced earlier.  At this appointment, he received the diagnosis Anxiety Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (NOS), though the diagnosis was not supported, as there is no mention in the session note of anxiety symptoms.

	c.  In March 2007, he completed a personality inventory presumably leading to the diagnosis Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder as that appeared on the diagnostic list.  There was no report of testing results in the record, and the note gives no details supporting the diagnosis.  This particular personality disorder is not a recognized diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR), it is under proposed conditions for further research.  At his last documented Behavioral Health visit while in the Army, the diagnosis Schizoid Personality Disorder was added.  Again, the record does not support this diagnosis.  Many of the session notes referred to a chapter 5-17 separation, and none to chapter 5-13.  His Report of Mental Status Evaluation was not available for review, nor did the medical record reflect the recommendation for separation.  Though diagnosed with Anxiety Disorder NOS, other than irritability and anger, only depressive symptoms were noted in his 2007 encounters, so that diagnosis was not supported.  A year earlier, when he struggled with past traumatic issues, that diagnosis may have applied.

	d.  Supporting his request for a change to his DD Form 214, he submitted a January 2013 psychological evaluation, almost 6 years after his discharge.  There are contradictions between what he told that psychologist and what he told providers while in the Army.  For instance, he denied a history of abuse, there was no report of fighting under his school history section, he downplayed his significant alcohol use, and he denied having any past legal charges.  The evaluator noted the applicant initially denied any history of psychiatric hospitalization and when confronted, gave a different reason for his hospitalization than the suicidal ideation leading to his hospitalization.  Further, he denied any history of suicide attempts.  The evaluator diagnosed him with Depressive Disorder NOS with a rule out of Personality Disorder NOS.

	e.  Although his record did not support the specific personality disorders diagnosed, the record does reflect a significant history of maladaptive behaviors across a variety of situations, to include recurrent trouble throughout school, repeated unlawful behaviors prior to joining the Army, affective instability and thinking resulting in multiple incidents of self-harm with a return to those ideations when upset, and difficulties with interpersonal relationships and occupational functioning.  His reported difficulties appeared long standing and continued into his adult life and Army service.  At the time of his discharge, the record supported a diagnosis of Personality Disorder NOS, and the applicant did not appear to have a clinical diagnosis for which he should have met a Medical Evaluation Board.

10.  On 3 July 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 not replied.   
11.  Army Regulation 635-200 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. 

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 "JFX" SPD code is the correct code for members separating under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of personality disorder.

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 his request.

2.  Although his Report of Mental Status Evaluation is not available for review with this case, according to the OTSG review the applicant's record reflects a significant history of maladaptive behaviors across a variety of situations, to include recurrent trouble throughout school, repeated unlawful behaviors prior to joining the Army, affective instability and thinking resulting in multiple incidents of self-harm with a return to those ideations when upset, and difficulties with interpersonal relationships and occupational functioning.  His reported difficulties appeared long standing and continued into his adult life and Army service.  At the time of his discharge, the record supported a diagnosis of Personality Disorder NOS.

3.  Based on his diagnosed personality disorder, his chain of command initiated separation action against him.  His 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.  

4.  His narrative reason for separation was assigned based on the fact that he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph    5-13 of for a personality disorder.  Absent this condition, there was no fundamental reason to process him for a discharge.  The only valid narrative reason for separation permitted under this paragraph and its corresponding SPD code is "JFX."  Therefore, he received the appropriate narrative reason for separation and the correct corresponding Separation Code.  


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)                                         AR20130006891





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130006891



6


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1