IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 2 June 2009
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090005313
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 reconsideration of his earlier request for correction of his military records to upgrade his discharge to honorable.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that he was not given a proper mental evaluation after his return from Iraq. He suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) which was the cause of his misconduct. PTSD led him to extreme binge drinking and trouble. He never had any problems prior to his return from Iraq. He feels that the Army did him wrong. His unit neglected to seek the help he needed or to look into the root of the problem. His last month and a half on active duty was nothing more than name calling, public embarrassment, humiliation, and isolation. His fellow Soldiers were told not to talk to him. He contends that he was a great Soldier who just needed some help.
3. The applicant provides, in support of his reconsideration, a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20080007622 on 31 July 2008.
2. The applicant has made additional argument that is new evidence requiring consideration by the Board.
3. In the original Board proceedings, the applicant stated that his discharge should be upgraded because he had served in Iraq and that his misconduct was the result of his suffering from PTSD. The Board determined that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to show that his discharge was in error or unjust. Therefore, his request was denied.
4. On 3 August 2004, approximately 6 months after the applicant's return from duty in Iraq, he underwent a mental status evaluation. This mental evaluation determined that he was mentally responsible and did not identify any conditions that would indicate he was suffering from PTSD. He was subsequently found medically qualified for separation.
5. On 14 October 2004, the applicant was discharged, with a general under honorable conditions discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct.
6. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribed procedures for separating personnel for misconduct because of a commission of a serious offense. A discharge under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. The separation authority may direct a general discharge if such a discharge is merited by the Soldier's overall record.
7. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, further provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the members service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends that he suffers from PTSD which was the cause for his misconduct. He feels that the Army did him wrong. He contends that he was a great Soldier who just needed some help.
2. There is no available evidence of record and the applicant has not provided any documentary evidence to substantiate his contention that his misconduct was the direct result of PTSD. In addition, in August 2004 a mental status evaluation, presumable conducted by competent military medical personnel, determined he was mentally responsible.
3. In view of the above, the applicant's request for reconsideration should be denied.
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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20080007622, dated 31 July 2008.
_________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) AR20090005313
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090005313
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012119
In fact, one cannot make a PTSD diagnosis unless the patient has actually met the "stressor criterion," which means that he or she has been exposed to an event that is considered traumatic. On 3 September 2014 in view of the foregoing information, the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations, and mitigating...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007628
PTSD was not a medical condition until 1980, nine years after his separation from the service. In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged UOTHC and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020509
The applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12b for patterns of misconduct and paragraph 14-12(c) for misconduct commission of a serious offense. The change to an honorable discharge would be helpful because he could seek the professional help he needs through the VA. c. A friend who states she has known the applicant for a year and a half and knows he is a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002983
In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged UOTHC and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150004158
The applicant states: a. He was recently serving in Iraq, but due to his wife's health situation had to be sent back on emergency leave. He had counseled both the applicant and his wife concerning the immediate situation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008047
He enlisted and worked hard to always do a good job. While in Kuwait, he called his wife who told him she was cheating on him and that he should forget about her. A warrant officer in the United States Army states that the applicant must have another opportunity to serve his nation because he has always been a "go-to" Soldier who sacrifices his personal time to assist fellow Soldiers.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015361
Counsel states the applicant served honorably in the United States Army for about 4 years including two tours of duty in Iraq. The commander stated his reason for this action was the applicant's wrongful possession of the drugs discussed above. 26 August 2010: The applicant reports and medical records indicate that he was diagnosed with and treated for PTSD while in Iraq.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013100
On 26 April 2006, the applicant's command initiated separation proceedings under Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 14-12c, by reason of misconduct - commission of a serious offense. The applicant's original DD Form 214 shows the following: a. discharge under other than honorable conditions with 5 years, 2 months, and 16 days of creditable active service and 276 days of lost time; b. separation in pay grade E-1; c....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010825
A year after returning from Iraq, the applicant was separated from the Army with a general discharge due to his drug use. He also reported being in a psychiatric hospital three times since returning from Iraq. He dismounted the vehicle ready for whatever could happen while outside working on the vehicle.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120013444
The applicant requests reconsideration of his request for: a. invitational travel orders to appear before a medical evaluation board (MEB) to determine if his diagnosed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) met retention standards; b. an informal physical evaluation board (PEB) to evaluate him for a determination of fitness and percentage of disability; c. to be retired by reason of physical disability retroactive to 26 September 2007; and d. entitlement to all back pay and allowances. On...