SAMR-RB 24 August 2017 MEMORANDUM FOR Case Management Division, US Army Review Boards Agency, 251 18th Street South, Suite 385, Arlington, VA 22202-3531 SUBJECT: Army Board for Correction of Military Records Record of Proceedings for AR20160001361 1. Reference the attached Army Board for Correction of Military Records Record of Proceedings, dated 13 July 2017, in which the Board members unanimously recommended denial of the applicant's request. 2. I have reviewed the findings, conclusions, and Board member recommendations. I find there is sufficient evidence to grant relief. Therefore, under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, I direct that all Department of the Army Records of the individual concerned be corrected by reissuing the applicant a DD Form 214 showing he was discharged under the authority of AR 635-200 paragraph 5-17 with the narrative reason for separation as Condition, Not a disability with the appropriate SPD code. 3. Request necessary administrative action be taken to effect the correction of records as indicated no later than 22 December 2017. Further, request that the individual concerned and counsel, if any, as well as any Members of Congress who have shown interest be advised of the correction and that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records be furnished a copy of the correspondence. BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: Encl . £/M&U - d. Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Review Boards) CF: ( ) OMPF BOARD DATE: 13 July 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001361 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: 13 July 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001361 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: 13 July 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160001361 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 his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show a different narrative reason for separation. 2. The applicant states he does not have a personality disorder. He witnessed an armored personnel carrier hit by an Abrams tank round while assigned to Fort Irwin, CA. Two crew members received serious burns and one crew member suffered from smoke inhalation. He started fearing for his life and the lives of the Soldiers with him. He was angry that our own troops could be hit by friendly fire. The night live-fire exercises were the worst. 3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214. 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 2 December 1985. Following completion of initial entry training, he was awarded military occupational specialty 63Y (Track Vehicle Mechanic). 3. A DA Form 4856 (General Counseling Form), dated 25 February 1992, shows he was counseled for being preoccupied with personal problems since 12 February 1992. He was depressed, worried, and slightly confused. His chain of command directed he receive a mental evaluation. The applicant concurred and signed the form. 4. A DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 26 February 1992, shows he underwent an evaluation by a licensed medical provider at Community Mental Health Services at Fort Irwin, CA. The medical provider stated his behavior was passive. He was fully alert and oriented with depressed mood or affect. His thinking process was slightly confused with normal thought content and good memory. The examiner concluded the applicant met medical retention requirements in accordance with chapter 3, Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness). The examiner additionally stated: a. Based on this evaluation, the diagnostic impressions, within the meaning of Army Regulation 40-501; Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel); and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd Edition, Revised, his diagnosis was: * adjustment disorder with depressed mood * personality disorder (not otherwise specified) with passive dependent traits b. His present marital and family situation is such that he finds it increasingly difficult to focus on the tasks at hand. Unless his circumstance is resolved, it is unlikely that he will return to a level of effectiveness sufficient to warrant his being retained on active duty until his expiration term of service (ETS) date. c. His retention on active duty until ETS may very well result in other more destructive behaviors because of his reactions to these problems that he finds unsolvable and unsurmountable while on active duty. d. Member has no potential to meet mobilization requirements, clearly has no potential for useful service under conditions of full mobilization, and discharge from the Army in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13 (personality disorder), would be in the best interests of both the individual and the Army. In light of his problems, his discharge should be handled as expeditiously as possible. 5. On or about 5 March 1992, he received a physical examination pending his elimination from the Army in which he was found with no physical defects that would interfere with his separation. 6. On or about 5 March 1992, his commander notified him that she was initiating action to separate him for personality disorder under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13. He was advised of his rights and his commander cited, as the specific reason for her proposed action was that his behavior was a disruptive element to his duty performance and mission. She further stated if approved, he would receive an honorable discharge. On this same date, he acknowledged receipt of the separation notification memorandum. 7. On 6 March 1992, he was afforded the opportunity to consult and waived his right to counsel and was understood the basis for the contemplated action to separate him for a personality disorder under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13. The applicant elected to waive consideration of his case and a personal appearance before an administrative separation board and elected not to submit statements on his own behalf. 8. Subsequently, his commander recommended his separation from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, and that he receive an honorable discharge. 9. On an unspecified date, the separation authority approved his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13, waived rehabilitative transfer requirements, and directed his service be characterized as honorable. He further determined the applicant would not be transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve. 10. On 13 March 1992, the applicant was accordingly discharged. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 6 years, 3 months, and 12 days of net active service this period. The following entries are also shown: * item 25 (Separation Authority) – Army Regulation 625-200, paragraph 5-13 * item 26 (Separation Code) – JFX * item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – Personality Disorder 11. There is no indication he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. 12. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained on 26 June 2017 from the Army Review Boards Agency Senior Medical Advisor, who opined: a. The applicant's limited personnel and medical records were reviewed in conjunction with his evidence he submitted with his application. b. A DA Form 3822-R, dated 26 February 1992, evaluated the applicant's mental status with passive behavior, depressed mood/affect, slightly confused thinking process, and otherwise normal. He met the retention requirements of chapter 3, Army Regulation 40-501. Based on his commander's requested evaluation, he was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with depressed mood and personality disorder, not otherwise specified, with passive dependent traits. His marital and family situation was such that he found it increasingly difficult to focus on the task at hand. Unless his circumstance was resolved, it was unlikely that he would return to a level of effectiveness sufficient to warrant his retention on active duty until his ETS date. His retention of active duty until ETS could result in other more destructive behaviors because of his reactions to his problems that he finds unsolvable and unsurmountable while on active duty. c. The advisory official opined that resolving particular circumstances may resolve an adjustment disorder but does not resolve manifestations of dependent personality disorder. d. Based on a review of his available medical documentation, the applicant met medical retention standards for his medical conditions and/or behavior conditions in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 3, and following the provisions set forth in Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) that were applicable to the applicant's era of service. e. The applicant's medical conditions were not duly considered during medical separation processing. (1) The basis for separation was family and/or personal problems affecting his performance. The Axis I diagnosis was Adjustment Disorder with depressed mood which correlates with the available history of his difficulties. (2) The Axis II diagnosis of dependent personality is not congruent with the applicant's personnel file, e.g., evaluation reports, which do not appear to support a dependent personality disorder diagnosis. (3) He may have had traits but the available documentation does not support a "pervasive and excessive need to be taken care of that leads to a submissive and clinging behavior and fears of separation." Differential diagnosis includes depressive disorder, anxiety, panic disorder and other mental health conditions manifesting with dependency (i.e. adjustment disorder with depressed mood). f. A review of the available documentation found some evidence of a medical condition that would support a change to the reason for the discharge in this case. There were no behavioral and/or mental or other medical notes alluding to a possible diagnosis of personality disorder other than the command requested mental status examination with an Axis I diagnosis of Adjustment disorder with depressed mood and Axis II of dependent personality disorder. A review of the applicant's medical records, personnel records, and other documents does not support assignment of personality disorder as a narrative reason or basis for separation. 13. A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant on 26 June 2017, for information and to allow him the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal. However, the applicant did not respond. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 provides for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-13 provides the criteria for discharge because of a personality disorder. It provides that a Soldier may be separated for personality disorders not amounting to disability under Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) which interfere with assignment to or performance of duty. The diagnosis of a personality disorder must be established by a physician trained in psychiatry and psychiatric diagnosis. Separation because of a personality disorder is authorized only if the diagnosis concludes that the disorder is so severe that the Soldier's ability to function effectively in the military environment is significantly impaired. 3. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) states SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations, which identify reasons for and types of separation from active duty. The SPD code JFX 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: 1. The applicant's request for correction of his DD Form 214 to show a different narrative reason for separation was carefully considered. 2. The evidence shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation at the direction of his commander. He was diagnosed with personality disorder (not otherwise specified) with passive dependent traits, which impaired his ability to function effectively in a military environment and likely would continue to do so. This diagnosis was made by a competent military medical authority. Accordingly, his chain of command initiated separation action as his behavior was a disruptive element to his duty performance and mission of the unit per applicable Army regulation. 3. His separation action was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations and there is no evidence of procedural errors that would have jeopardized his rights. His discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. 4. He contends he does not have a personality disorder; however, he does not provide any other justification or reason for his discharge. 5. His narrative reason for separation was assigned based on the fact that he was discharged for a personality disorder under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-13. Absent this condition, there was no fundamental reason to process him for 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. 6. An advisory opinion was requested to review the applicant's medical records and contention. The advisory official found some evidence of a medical condition that would support a change to the reason for the applicant's discharge in this case. The advisory official opined the review does not support assignment of personality disorder as a narrative reason or basis for separation; however, he does not conclude or recommend what would be the basis. 7. Notwithstanding the advisory opinion, the applicant was evaluated by a licensed medical professional at the time who evaluated the applicant's condition as it existed in the 1992 time frame. The medical diagnosis at the time reflected his condition and the applicable Army regulation provided that separation because of a personality disorder was authorized only if the diagnosis concluded that the disorder was so severe that the Soldier's ability to function effectively in the military environment was significantly impaired. 8. The applicant's chain of command, who could better evaluate him and the needs of the Army at that time, determined the medical diagnosis of personality disorder was a reflection of his condition and its impact on his military duties at the time of service and/or separation. His diagnosis in 1992 was personality disorder, which was a basis for administrative separation. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160001361 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160001361 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2