IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    30 September 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140003730 


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 correction of item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show that he was discharged for medical reasons rather than a "Personality disorder."

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was discharged due to a medical condition in his left knee.  His sergeant was a very angry lady who tried to have him discharged dishonorably, but they found no fault so she reduced his rank/pay grade from private first class (PFC)/E-3 to private (PV1)/E-1 and made him leave. He never thought his discharge was something other than medical until he recently reviewed his records and discovered this discrepancy.  He is currently a pastor.

3.  The applicant provides five Standard Forms 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) extracted from his medical record.

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 records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 July 1996 in the rank/pay grade of PFC/E-3, which was the highest rank/pay grade he attained during his military service.  However, he held the rank/pay grade of private (PV1)/E-1 at the time of his discharge.

3.  The applicant provides five Standard Forms 600 extracted from his medical records which show he sought medical treatment at the Troop 3 Clinic, Winn Army Community Hospital (WACH), Fort Stewart, GA on the dates shown:

	a.  15 January 1997, he reported that he had been experiencing pain in his left knee for 3 weeks.  He said it began hurting during his last Army Physical Fitness Test and that after the holidays the pain returned while he was going down some stairs.  He stated that his knee went out from under him and he was experiencing redness and point tenderness, could not straighten his knee, and had difficulty putting pressure on his knee.  As a result, he was prescribed Motrin, given a temporary (10 day) physical limitations profile, and scheduled to return for a follow-up in 1 week.

	b.  21 January 1997, he reported that he had fallen on some stairs and injured his knee.  He reported an improvement in the pain, but noted that it still awakened him from sleep and he had a tender knot on his knee.  As a result, X-rays of his knee were taken, he was told to continue using crutches for 5 days, and continued on his prescription for Motrin.

	c.  28 January 1997,  he reported for his follow-up knee appointment and it was noted that he was still on crutches and taking Motrin.  He was able to extend his knee, but experienced discomfort when doing so.  As a result, he was instructed to continue using crutches, given a 1-week profile from physical training, instructed to perform stretching and strengthening exercises, and told to return for a follow-up evaluation in 1 week.

	d.  4 February 1997, he reported falling on his knee 2 weeks prior when his knee gave out on him, that the pain still awakened him at night, and that he was unable to fully extend his knee.  It was noted that he was still using crutches and that his reported pain was out of proportion to his examination and history.  As a result, he was instructed to discontinue use of the crutches and encouraged to walk with a cane for 48 hours.  He was further instructed to resume physical training, but walking instead of running and to return for a follow-up evaluation in 1 week.

	e.  25 February 1997, it was noted that the applicant had suffered left knee pain since he injured it during his last APFT run at Advanced Individual Training prior to Christmas, then he reinjured it when he fell down some stairs.  X-rays on 15 January 1997 revealed a small effusion on his left knee and otherwise normal right knee.  He was put on crutches and instructed to follow-up in 1 week.  He returned 3 weeks later, still on crutches.  Crutches were taken away and it was explained that part of treatment was quadriceps strengthening and weight bearing.  He was put on a cane for 48 hours; however, when he returned 21 days later he was still using the cane.  As a result, he was instructed to quit using a cane.  Proper treatment was discussed at length and he was given strengthening and other exercises to perform.  The importance of doing the exercises, getting off the cane, and putting weight on his left leg were explained to him.  He seemed to understand and agree. 

4.  The applicant's record contains four DA Forms 4856 (General Counseling Form) which show he was counseled on the following dates for the reasons shown:

	a.  28 February 1997, for failing to report for 0630 formation.  It was noted that in addition to missing accountability formation, he had stated that he was going to sick call, but never showed up at the clinic.  Instead, he elected to go to the mental health clinic without informing his leadership.  He was advised that this type of behavior would not be tolerated in the future.  The applicant acknowledged and concurred with this counseling.

	b.  3 March 1997, for disobeying a lawful order from his company commander, disobeying an order or regulation, and going absent without leave (AWOL).  It was noted that he was given a direct order by his company commander to remain outside the Command Post until the commander returned from battalion staff meeting.  When the commander returned from the meeting, the applicant had left the field training site for main post.  He took it upon himself to find transportation back to main post and left the training site without permission.  This was a violation of Article 86 (AWOL), Article 90 (Assaulting or willfully disobeying a superior officer), and Article 92 (Failure to obey an order or regulation) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  Even though the applicant went to the emergency room at WACH, it was not the solution for his situation.  His platoon sergeant reminded him that he was responsible for the applicant's safety and his actions could have caused a serious injury.  As a result, the platoon sergeant was requesting UCMJ action be taken by the battalion commander.  The applicant acknowledged, but did not concur with this counseling.  However, he elected not to write a statement explaining why he did not concur.

	c.  6 March 1997, for disobeying lawful orders from his superior noncommissioned officer (NCO).  It was noted that the applicant was given a direct order to move his assigned vehicle and camouflage it to support a field exercise.  He refused to do so and requested to see the chaplain because he was apparently distressed over being in the field.  The NCO informed the applicant that they were not allowing him to return because the mission was important.  The applicant then informed the NCO in the presence of his platoon leader that he was not doing anything.  He was advised that this would not be tolerated and that the NCO would request UCMJ action under Article 92 with the maximum punishment because this had not been the applicant's first offense of this nature.

	d.  6 March 1997, for dereliction of his assigned duties.  He had received counseling from an NCO during a training exercise regarding his duties as an ambush platoon Soldier.  This counseling was due to his continuous neglect of his assigned missions and duties.  It was noted that every time he was assigned a duty he would find anxiety that would cause him to leave for the Inspector General's office, emergency room, Mental Health, and any other Army resources. Once given this counseling, he willfully became negligent in his duties.  He was advised that this was not acceptable and would not be tolerated.  As a result, he was further advised that UCMJ action would be requested.  The applicant acknowledged but did not concur with this counseling.  However, he elected not to write a statement explaining why he did not concur.

5.  While holding the rank/pay grade of PFC/E-3, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ for violating Articles 86, 90, and 91, UCMJ for the following offenses:

* 28 February 1997, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty
* 3 March 1997, going from his appointed place of duty without authority
* 3 March 1997, disobeying a lawful order from a superior commissioned officer
* 6 March 1997, disobeying a lawful order from a superior NCO
* 6 March 1997, being disrespectful in language toward an NCO

His appeal of the NJP was denied and as a result his punishment was reduction to the rank/pay grade of PV1/E-1, a forfeiture of $450 pay per month for 2 months, and 45 days of restriction.

6.  The applicant's record contains a memorandum, dated 7 March 1997, subject: Certificate of Psychiatric Evaluation on (the applicant) that was rendered by Chief, Division Mental Health Activity (DMHA).  The purpose of the memorandum was to certify that the applicant was evaluated on 24 January, 7, 24, 26, 28 February, 5 and 7 March 1997.

	a.  Summary of evaluation:  The applicant presented to the DMHA describing difficulty adjusting to the military and numerous physical complaints.  His personality style included a rigid approach to problems, a sense of entitlement, a dependence on family to assist him with decisions, and a history of poor coping style when things have not gone his way.  These had resulted in great difficulty in adjusting to the military lifestyle.  Over the last month, the applicant had required multiple emergency room and emergency DMHA visits as he had very limited capacity to deal with his situation.  This had also required a great deal of support from his unit potentially compromising the unit's ability to perform their mission.

	b.  Diagnoses:

		(1)  Axis I:  Adjustment Disorder with Mixed Disturbance of Conduct and Emotion

		(2)  Axis II:  Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified

		(3)  Axis III:  Multiple Physical Complaints

	c.  Findings:

		(1)  the applicant met the retention requirements of chapter 3, Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) and there was no psychiatric disease/defect which warranted disposition through medical channels.

		(2)  The applicant was mentally sound and able to appreciate any wrongfulness in his conduct and to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.  He had the mental capacity to understand and participate in board or other administrative proceedings.

		(3)  The Axis II diagnosis shown above represented a character and behavior disorder within the meaning of Army Regulation 40-501 and Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations).  The condition was a deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of long duration which interfered with the applicant's ability to perform his duties.  The disorder is so severe that the applicant's ability to function effectively in the military environment was significantly impaired.
		(4)  Return to duty would probably lead to a repetition of such responses as were noted prior to evaluation.

		(5)  The condition and the problems presented by the applicant were not in the opinion of this examiner amenable to further hospitalization, treatment, transfer, disciplinary action, training or reclassification to another type of duty in the military.  It was unlikely that efforts to rehabilitate or develop the applicant into a satisfactory member of the military would be successful.

	d.  Recommendation:  It was strongly recommended that the applicant be administratively separated as expeditiously as possible under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13.

7.  The applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of personality disorder.  The commander specifically noted that the applicant's deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern behavior of a long duration interfered with his ability to perform his duties.  The commander stated he was recommending that the applicant receive an honorable discharge.

8.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of his pending separation action and he was subsequently advised by counsel of the basis for the contemplated action to separate him for a personality disorder under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200.  He requested consulting counsel, but elected to waive his right to submit a statement in his own behalf. 

9.  His immediate commander initiated separation action against him under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of personality disorder.  The commander remarked that separation was specifically recommended because of the applicant's deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of a long duration which interfered with his ability to perform his duties.  The applicant's intermediate commander recommended approval of his separation with an honorable discharge.

10.  On 15 April 1997, the separation authority approved the proposed separation action against the applicant in accordance with paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 and directed that his service be characterized as honorable.



11.  On 18 April 1997, he was discharged accordingly.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he completed 9 months of creditable active service during this period.  The form also contains the following entries:

* item 25 (Separation Authority) shows the entry Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13
* item 26 (Separation Code) shows the entry "JFX"
* item 28 shows the entry "Personality disorder"

12.  The applicant's record is void of any evidence and he has not provided any evidence to substantiate his claim that he was told that he was being discharged as a result of his knee injury or any other unfitting physical medical condition.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-13 provides that a Soldier may be separated for personality disorder, not amounting to disability under Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), that interferes with assignment to or performance of duty.  The regulation requires that the condition is a deeply ingrained maladaptive pattern of behavior of long duration that interferes with the Soldier's ability to perform duty.

14.  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 contends that his narrative reason for separation should be corrected.

2.  The evidence shows he underwent an extensive mental status evaluation and it was determined that he met the criteria for Personality Disorder and it was likely he would continue to present with emotional and behavioral difficulties that reflect a long-standing pattern of difficulties.  Accordingly, he was discharged in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 625-200.

3.  The evidence of record shows his separation action was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations and there is no indication of procedural errors that would have jeopardized his rights.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with the law and regulations applicable at the time and the character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.  

4.  The applicant's narrative reason for separation was assigned based on the fact that he was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 5-13 of Army Regulation 635-200 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 "Personality disorder."  Therefore, he received the appropriate narrative reason for separation.

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)                                         AR20140003730





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140003730



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1