IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  15 August 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130007086 


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 the narrative reason for his separation as something other than personality disorder.

2.  The applicant states he was discharged for "Personality Disorder."  However, after his discharge, he reported to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and got a diagnosis for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  Years later, another VA representative told him he was one of several thousands to have this done to them and that he could request a change to a regular/standard honorable discharge.

3.  The applicant did not provide any additional evidence.

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 on 27 June 2001 and he held military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).  He served in Afghanistan from 19 April 2004 to 21 April 2005.

3.  On 11 May 2007, he underwent a mental status evaluation.  His record contains a MEDCOM Form 699-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation) that shows:

	a.  He was strongly recommended for administrative separation as expeditiously as possible.  According to his recent psychological tests, he met the criteria for administrative separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation – Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 5-13, for a personality disorder.  His retention, as an emotionally and behaviorally disordered Soldier, puts him at risk to continue to engage in such behaviors for which psychiatric hospitalization or action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice may be necessary.

	b.  The applicant represents a command liability and impairs overall unit readiness and functioning.  The condition and problems are not amenable to hospitalization, treatment, transfer, disciplinary action, training or reclassification to another specialty.  Efforts to help this Soldier's condition proved unsuccessful. He currently denied suicidal or homicidal ideations.  He was mentally sound and he was able to distinguish right from wrong and to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.  He met the retention requirements of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) (he does not have an unfitting condition).  His final diagnosis was:

* Axis I: Adjustment Disorder with depressed mood
* Axis II: Personality Disorder - Not Otherwise Specified (NOS), Borderline and Paranoid Traits

4.  On 25 June 2007, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, because of a personality disorder.  He stated that the applicant had been diagnosed with a personality disorder along with an adjustment disorder with depressed mood, which is incompatible with military service.

5.  On 25 June 2007, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of separation action and he consulted with legal counsel.  He 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 waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and/or appearance before and administrative separation board.  He also 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 29 June 2007, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, by reason of personality disorder and directed the applicant be issued an honorable discharge.

8.  On 13 July 2007, the applicant was discharged accordingly.  He completed 6 years and 17 days of creditable active service.  The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued at the time shows in:

* item 25 (Separation Authority) the entry "Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13"
* item 26 (Separation Code) the entry "JFX"
* item 27 (Reentry (RE) Code) - "3"
* item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) the entry "Personality Disorder"

9.  In connection with the processing of this case, on 13 June 2013, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG), Director of Health Care Delivery.  The advisory official states conclusions for this advisory opinion are drawn solely based on available documentation from his time in active service unless otherwise noted.

	a.  The first indication of possible behavioral health symptoms in the available record occurred on [Applicant's] post-deployment health assessments in March and April 2005, the first while he was still in theater and the second about two weeks after redeployment.  He endorsed "same" in response to being bothered in the previous two weeks by little interest or pleasure in doing things and feeling down, depressed or hopeless, indicating no plans to seek mental health assistance for those feelings.  In response to a screening questionnaire completed 6 December 2005, [Applicant] endorsed the same symptoms and 

indicated he thought they were related to his deployment.  During a visit for a physical condition 19 January 2006, he reported seeing someone for depression. He was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety during a Physical Medicine Department visit and received a referral for biofeedback.

	b.  On 6 March 2006, he participated in an intake for biofeedback for assistance with pain and anxiety.  He reported seeing a counselor through Army OneSource and experiencing stress related to work, with significant anxiety when addressing authority figures, persistent worry, and insomnia.  His diagnosis was deferred at that time.  Seen by Neurology later in the month for his headaches, the provider referred him to psychiatry for depression, PTSD, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and possible Bipolar Disorder.  After seeing the applicant on 27 March 2006, the psychiatrist assessed his PTSD symptoms and found he did not meet criteria at that time, lacking the persistent avoidance of trauma-related triggers.  The psychiatrist also ruled out Bipolar Disorder.  [Applicant] did meet criteria for Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode and Generalized Anxiety Disorder and was prescribed Zoloft.  Other symptoms noted and apparently not of concern were mild auditory and visual experiences of hearing his name, vague whispering, other sounds out of context, and occasionally seeing someone in his peripheral vision who was not there.  Seen for an intake in the Psychology Department approximately two weeks later, [Applicant] reported trying the Zoloft for five days and discontinuing because of "increased jitteriness" and diagnosis was deferred.  He saw a different psychiatrist on 3 May 2006 who found his Major Depression and Generalized Anxiety Disorder symptoms resolved and diagnosed him with Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Anxiety and Depressed Mood.  While not specified in the notes, the adjustment disorder could reasonably be considered chronic taking into account his earlier report to a different provider of depressive feelings during and since deployment and anxiety symptoms after deployment.  [Applicant] was also diagnosed with Parasomnia NOS.  He was seen again about five days later with no new developments.

	c.  [Applicant] did not engage in further counseling via the Military Health System until November 2006.  Due to deploy in a month, he was concerned he could not function effectively on deployment.  He reported symptoms of fatigue, sleep problems, anxiety, depression, decreased concentration, and loss of interest in his usual activities.  He expressed anger and the opinion his previous mental health providers had not taken him seriously except for his off-post provider.  He was again diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depressed Mood.  Though not specified as acute, given he had not been in for services in the previous six months, it is reasonable to assume his symptoms had resolved in the interim and this was a new episode.  He was referred to and 

attended four stress and anger management groups in November and December 2006.  In February 2007, [Applicant] was referred from Soldier Readiness Processing to determine his deployability and was seen again in the Psychology Department.  At this visit he reported no improvement from prior sessions.  He further related "hearing things and seeing things" since his return from deployment.  He stated he "hears a voice saying things like 'listen.'''  He stated he saw someone beside him when driving, and twice a week in the daytime saw people trying to break into his house.  The psychologist determined [Applicant's] report indicated a thorough evaluation with testing via a command-directed evaluation.  [Applicant] did not want further counseling at that time, though he was seen again approximately a month later as a walk-in for marital and anger issues, resulting in a referral to Military OneSource.  There is no explanation in the record to account for his reported auditory and visual hallucination-like experiences.  He repeated this theme over the course of time; however, there did not appear to be concern on the part of the providers as it was never incorporated into a diagnosis.

	d.  On 2 May 2007, [Applicant] was seen for a mental status evaluation.  The clinical social worker expressed concern about the veracity of [Applicant's] statements given his repeatedly-voiced desire over the course of sessions to leave the military and a pattern of unhappiness when deployment is expected.  The next record indicated a diagnosis of Personality Disorder - NOS apparently based on psychological testing results, and his Report of MSE indicated he exhibited Borderline and Paranoid Traits.  He was then recommended for separation in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13.  Neither the testing interpretation nor examples of his long-standing personality traits or even descriptors of those traits were included in the note.  The record does not clearly support the diagnosis of Personality Disorder.

	e.  [Applicant] reported on his application to correct his record he had been seen by the VA and diagnosed with PTSD, apparently soon after discharge.  Those records are not available.  There is a VA record approximately five years after his discharge indicating his PTSD screen was positive; however, an actual diagnosis of PTSD is not apparent.  Additionally, at the time of his discharge, [Applicant] completed his post-deployment health re-assessment and his PTSD screen was negative, as he endorsed only two of four post-traumatic stress symptoms on the screen.  In this case, the record does not clearly support a diagnosis of Personality Disorder NOS.  There is also no indication that, at the time of his discharge, he had a behavioral health condition for which a Medical Evaluation Board would have been indicated.

10.  On 3 July 2013, the applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion for information and to allow him the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal. He did not respond.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 at the time stated a Soldier could be separated for personality disorder (as determined by medical authority), not amounting to disability under Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) that interfered with assignment to or performance of duty.  The regulation required that the condition be a deeply-ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration that interfered with the Soldier's ability to perform duty.  Commanders would not take action prescribed in this paragraph in lieu of disciplinary action.  The diagnosis must have concluded that the disorder was so severe that the Soldier’s ability to function in the military environment was significantly impaired.

12.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD)) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It states that the SPD code "JFX" is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, by reason of personality disorder.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

2.  The applicant's Report of Mental Status Evaluation shows he was diagnosed with "Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood" and "Personality Disorder - NOS - Borderline and Paranoid Traits."  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.

3.  However, a review by OTSG indicated there was insufficient evidence to support the Personality Disorder diagnosis.  There is a VA record approximately five years after his discharge indicating his PTSD screen was positive; however, an actual diagnosis of PTSD is not apparent.  

4.  In view of the foregoing and in response to his specific request, and as a matter of equity, the applicant should have the narrative reason for his separation changed to Secretarial Authority with the corresponding separation code. 

BOARD VOTE:

____X____  ____X____  ___X_____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by
voiding his DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 June 2006 and issuing him a new DD Form 214 to show he was discharged with an honorable characterization of service by reason of Secretarial Authority, with an SPD code of "JFF." 



      ___________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)                                         AR20130007086



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130007086



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1