BOARD DATE: 7 July 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150001987 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x_____ __x______ __x___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 7 July 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150001987 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 7 July 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150001987 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 item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show she was honorably separated for disability instead of a "condition - not a disability." 2. The applicant states: * her discharge was categorized as "condition, not a disability;" she is currently receiving 10 percent disability; she wants this corrected * her diagnosis at discharge was "personality disorder," indicating she had a pre-existing condition, which she did not * she is only receiving 10 percent for a condition that was caused by her service in Iraq; she feels she should receive more * her condition upon discharge is greater than simply a personality disorder and she wants this matter looked into 3. The applicant provides her DD Form 214 and separation packet. 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 18 June 2004 and she held military occupational specialty (MOS) 92G (Food Service Specialist). She served in Iraq from 5 December 2005 to 28 November 2006. 3. On 25 April 2007, she underwent a mental status evaluation at the Fort Hood Resilience and Reconstruction Center. Her diagnosis was that of adjustment disorder. The MEDCOM Form 699-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation) shows: * she was fully alert and oriented with normal behavior; her mood was labile but her thinking process was clear and her thought content was normal * she met the diagnostic criteria for borderline personality disorder and this disorder did not meet the criteria for a medical evaluation board * her disorder clearly interfered with her ability to perform within the military * her borderline personality disorder was not amenable to brief psychotherapeutic rehabilitation; she had attended mental health treatment but did not make substantial improvement * she was recommended for administrative separation as the best course of action 4. On 18 May 2007, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against her under the provisions of paragraph 5-17 of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) for other designated physical or mental conditions. The specific reason was the applicant's borderline personality disorder. The commander recommended an honorable discharge. 5. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation notification memorandum and subsequently consulted with legal counsel. She was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action and its effects, the rights available to her, and the effect of a waiver of her rights. She acknowledged she understood that she may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge under honorable conditions was issued to her. 6. On 22 May 2007, the applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action against her under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17. He recommended the applicant receive an honorable discharge. The intermediate commander recommended approval of the discharge with an honorable discharge. 7. Consistent with the chain of command's recommendations, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17 because of other designated physical or mental conditions with an honorable discharge. She was accordingly discharged on 13 June 2007. 8. Her DD Form 214 shows she was discharged on 13 June 2007 under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, based on a physical condition, not a disability, with an honorable discharge. She was assigned a separation code of "JFV." This form also shows she completed 2 years, 11 months, and 26 days of creditable active service. 9. On 22 April 2016, the Board corresponded with the applicant and requested she provide the medical documents that support her diagnosis of a medical condition other than the personality disorder. She did not respond. 10. The Board requested and the Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG) provided an advisory opinion on 24 June 2016 in the processing of this case. An OTSG official referenced the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5th Edition; AR 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) with a rapid revision, dated 4 August 2011; and AR 635-200, dated 6 September 2011. The OTSG official stated: a. The applicant entered active duty on 18 June 2004 and received an honorable discharge on 13 June 2007 in accordance with AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17 (Condition, Not a Disability). She served in Iraq from December 2005 to November 2006. In January 2015, she requested that the Board change her reason for separation from condition, not a disability. OTSG was asked to "review the applicant's petition and the allied papers, respond to the issues raised by applicant with the competence or expertise of the agency and finally, prepare an advisory opinion analyzing the applicant's issues and the Board's questions, with a reasoned recommendation as to the recommended adjudication." This opinion is based on the information provided by the Board and records available in the DOD electronic medical record (AHLTA). b. According to the applicant, she was "unfairly and illegally diagnosed with a condition which is far less than the condition I actually have." Although she did not specify what relief she is seeking, the implication is that she should have been given a medical separation. c. With respect to her first assertion, her diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) is well substantiated in her medical service record. She was first seen by Behavioral Health (BH) in February 2007 for depression. She told the provider that her deployment "wasn't that difficult or hard on me," but that she had no desire to deploy again. On 4 April 2007, a clinical psychologist hypothesized the presence of a personality disorder based on her history of "interpersonal conflict, occupational problems, and self-mutilation." Other elements of her history consistent with BPD include engaging in potentially harmful activities, self-mutilation, unstable relationships and persistent suicidal ideation. She was diagnosed with depression, which met medical retention standards, and borderline personality disorder and was cleared for administrative separation. d. Regarding her second claim that she has a far more serious condition caused by her service in Iraq, there is no evidence at the time of her separation she met the criteria for any psychiatric disorder that did not met retention standards. Prior to her separation, she was deemed to have no condition warranting a medical review and to meet retention standards. 11. The applicant was provided with a copy of this advisory opinion to give her an opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal. She did not respond. REFERENCES: 1. AR 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-17 provided that a Soldier could be separated for personality disorder, not amounting to disability under AR 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), which 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. The regulation also directed that commanders would not take action prescribed in this chapter in lieu of disciplinary action, required that the diagnosis concluded the disorder was so severe that the Soldier’s ability to function in the military environment was significantly impaired, and stated that separation for personality disorder was not appropriate when separation was warranted under AR 635-40. 2. AR 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 code to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD of "JFV" as the appropriate code to assign to enlisted Soldiers administratively discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, based on a physical condition, not a disability. 3. Title 10, U.S. Code, chapter 61, provides the Secretaries of the Military Departments with authority to retire or discharge a member if they find the member unfit to perform military duties because of physical disability. The U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency is responsible for administering the disability system and executes Secretary of the Army decision-making authority as directed by Congress in chapter 61 and in accordance with Department of Defense Directive 1332.18 and AR 635-40. a. The objectives of the system are to: * maintain an effective and fit military organization with maximum use of available manpower * provide benefits for eligible Soldiers whose military service is terminated because of service-connected disability * provide prompt disability processing while ensuring that the rights and interests of the government and the Soldier are protected b. Soldiers are referred to the disability system when referred by HRC or: * when they no longer meet medical retention standards in accordance with AR 40-501, chapter 3, as evidenced in a medical evaluation board * receive a permanent medical profile, P3 or P4, and are referred by an MOS Medical Retention Board * are command-referred for a fitness-for-duty medical examination c. The purpose of the medical evaluation board is to determine whether the service member’s injury or illness is severe enough to compromise his/her ability to return to full duty based on the job specialty designation of the branch of service. A physical evaluation board is an administrative body possessing the authority to determine whether or not a service member is fit for duty. A designation of "unfit for duty" is required before an individual can be separated from the military because of an injury or medical condition. Service members who are determined to be unfit for duty due to disability either are separated from the military or are permanently retired, depending on the severity of the disability and length of military service. Individuals who are "separated" receive a one-time severance payment, while veterans who retire based upon disability receive monthly military retirement payments and have access to all other benefits afforded to military retirees. d. The mere presence of a medical impairment does not in and of itself justify a finding of unfitness. In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature and degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the Soldier may reasonably be expected to perform because of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating. Reasonable performance of the preponderance of duties will invariably result in a finding of fitness for continued duty. A Soldier is physically unfit when a medical impairment prevents reasonable performance of the duties required of the Soldier's office, grade, rank, or rating. Only the unfitting conditions or defects and those that contribute to unfitness will be considered in arriving at the rated degree of incapacity warranting retirement or separation for disability. 4. AR 40-501 governs medical fitness standards for enlistment; induction; appointment, including officer procurement programs; retention; and separation, including retirement. Chapter 3 gives the various medical conditions and physical defects that may render a Soldier unfit for further military service and which fall below the standards required for the individuals in paragraph 3-2. These medical conditions and physical defects, individually or in combination, are those that significantly limit or interfere with the Soldier’s performance of their duties or may compromise or aggravate the Soldier’s health or well-being if they were to remain in the military Service. DISCUSSION: 1. The evidence of record shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation that diagnosed her as having borderline adjustment disorder. Her diagnosis of this disorder is substantiated in her medical service record. She was first seen by BH in February 2007 for depression. She told the provider that her deployment was not hard on her but she did not desire to deploy again. 2. Her April 2007 mental status evaluation indicated the presence of a personality disorder based on her history of "interpersonal conflict, occupational problems, and self-mutilation." Other elements of her history consistent with borderline personality disorder include engaging in potentially harmful activities, self-mutilation, unstable relationships and persistent suicidal ideation. She was diagnosed with depression, which met medical retention standards, and borderline personality disorder and was cleared for administrative separation. 3. There is no evidence in her available records and she provides none to show at the time of her separation she met the criteria for any psychiatric disorder that did not meet retention standards. Prior to her separation, she was deemed to have no condition warranting a medical review and to meet retention standards. 4. Her personality disorder affected her military performance. Accordingly, her chain of command initiated separation action against her under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17. All requirements of law and regulation were met, and her rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. 5. There is no evidence in the available records and she did not provide sufficient evidence that shows she was diagnosed with any other condition that would have warranted her entry into the disability system. Medical separation is based on existence of a condition that did not meet retention standards. A disability rating assigned by the Army is based on the level of disability at the time of the Soldier's separation and can only be accomplished through the disability system. 6. Her narrative reason for separation was assigned based on the fact that she was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-17, due to a medical condition - not a disability. Absent this condition, there was no fundamental reason to process her for discharge. The only valid narrative reason for separation permitted under this paragraph is "Condition - Not a Disability" and the appropriate separation code associated with this discharge is "JFV." //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150001987 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150001987 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2