IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  30 April 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130002610 


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 he be placed on the retired list in the rank of lieutenant colonel (LTC)/O-5.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  he respectfully requests the Board reconsider the findings of the Army Grade Determination Review Board (AGDRB) which determined he will retire in the rank of major (MAJ) instead of LTC.	 

	b.  it is his belief that the AGDRB focused on the one aberration in his career and did not consider his entire body of work as an LTC or the extenuating factors involved in his relief from command as a result of his Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) with major depression.

	c.  based on his performance before and after this aberration resulting in his relief from command, he believes the Board will come to the conclusion that he has satisfactorily served as an LTC and should be given the honor to retire at that rank. 

	d.  all throughout his career he has always put forth the extra effort and held a strong belief in the Army as an institution.  As a captain, he was fortunate to command multiple infantry companies during a time in the Army when 18 months of command was the normal.  As a MAJ, he served in three MAJ Branch Qualifying positions.  He was selected for LTC "below the zone."  After his promotion to LTC, he was selected to fill the duties of the Joint Readiness Training Center and Fort Polk Operations Officer.  He was selected over other LTCs who were former battalion commanders or who were much more senior.

	e.  in October 2008, while serving as the Iraqi Security Forces Coordinator, he endured his second direct hit on his vehicle by an explosive-formed penetrator.  He was blessed that he had no physical injuries from any of these attacks.  However, in November 2008, he was seen by the brigade surgeon with the concern he was feeling somewhat depressed mostly due to the caustic command climate originating from the Brigade Combat Team commander and his incompetence in the face of battle.  He was provided the anti-depressant Zoloft which he took throughout the remainder of his deployment.  In January 2009 during the reverse Soldier readiness process, he went through the behavior health station where the provider gave him a prescription to continue taking Zoloft with the direction to see a provider when he arrived at his next duty station.  

   f.  in early July 2009, without the consultation of a health provider, he quit taking Zoloft.  He did so because he felt good mentally and physically.  Approximately a month after being off the medication, he began to slip into these frequent dark moods filled with guilt from combat actions in Iraq.  He isolated himself from his family and began drinking alcohol much more frequently.  He did not realize at the time he had slipped into depression and was enduring symptoms of PTSD.  On 3 August 2009, he attempted suicide in front of his family.  The next morning he was escorted to the Tripler Army Medical Center where he met his first psychiatrist and began his journey with Behavioral Health which continues today.  He did not inform his supervisor of this incident due to the stigma associated with PTSD and especially for a commander to have the affliction.  He was not willing to risk losing his opportunity to command, something he worked so hard to get throughout his career.
   
   g.  he performed his duties as a garrison commander in an exemplary manner which is well documented in his first command OER.  His duties as the Oahu garrison commander kept him alive because in the evenings after duty and on the weekends, he was in a complete downward spiral of high-risk activities and on a path of self destruction.  Even though he was seen weekly by his psychiatrist and taking all prescribed medications, he could not come to grips with the fact he had PTSD and major depression.  He continued to be an outstanding commander but at the same time he was destroying his family, nearly losing them to a divorce.  He was engaged in high-risk behavior which ultimately resulted in his relief from command and a GOMOR.  He takes responsibility for his actions that resulted in his relief from command and effectively ended his Army career.  The extenuating circumstances involved with his uncharacteristic behavior were a direct result of his PTSD and major depression.
   h.  he was an outstanding officer before this aberration occurred in Hawaii and that, after his mistake, he has performed in an exceptional manner in colonel level positions which should permit the Board to conclude that he has satisfactorily served at the rank of LTC and should be able to retire as such.          

3.  The applicant provides:

* Rebuttal memorandum
* Original Officer Evaluation Report (OER) with through date of 11 February 2011
* Relief for Cause (RFC) OER
* General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR)
* Board of Inquiry findings
* Letters of recommendation
* Psychiatrist statement
* LTC OERs
* MAJ OERs
* Awards

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was appointed a first lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve on 
1 February 1993.  He was appointed a MAJ in the Regular Army on 
20 November 2001.  He was promoted to LTC on 1 June 2007.  He was deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq.    

2.  His OERs for the period 26 January 2007 through 6 November 2009 show he was rated "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote" for his performance during the rating period and his potential for promotion by his rater and he was rated "Best Qualified" by his senior rater for promotion potential to the next higher grade.   

3.  On 7 July 2010, he received a GOMOR for:

* engaging in misconduct over the course of several months while he commanded the U.S. Army Garrison-Oahu
* he had inappropriate relationships with two women, while he was married
* he received uncompensated housing and misused a Government vehicle
* he lied under oath to the officer investigating the allegations




4.  He received a RFC OER covering the period 11 November 2009 through 
7 July 2010 for duties as the Battalion Commander for the U.S. Army Garrison, Oahu, Hawaii.  

   a.  In Part IV (Performance Evaluation - Professionalism), the rater placed an "X" in the "NO" box for Honor and Integrity.

   b.  In Part Va (Evaluate the Rated Officer's Performance During the Rating Period and His Potential for Promotion), the rater placed an "X" in the "Unsatisfactory Performance, Do Not Promote" box.

   c.  In Part VIIa (Evaluate the Rated Officer's Promotion Potential to the Next Higher Grade), the senior rater placed an "X" in the "Do Not Promote" box and "Below Center of Mass - Retain" box.  

5.  His OERs for the period 8 July 2010 through 11 February 2012 show he was rated "Outstanding Performance, Must Promote" for his performance during the rating period and his potential for promotion by his rater and he was rated "Best Qualified" by his senior rater for promotion potential to the next higher grade.   

6.  On 12 July 2012, a Field Board of Inquiry determined he would be retained on active duty without reassignment. 

7.  On 14 November 2012, a request for a grade determination for retirement was submitted to the AGDRB.  On 12 December 2012, the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Review Boards), Office of the Assistant Secretary, Manpower and Reserve Affairs, directed that he be placed on the retired list in the grade of O-4 (MAJ) if his retirement is approved.

8.  He provided five letters of recommendation from his chain of command.  They attest:

* with one exception, the applicant's performance has been exemplary
* he accepts responsibility for his actions
* the one aberration in his file is not indicative of the characterization of his career nor his service in the grade of LTC
* he is an exemplary, combat proven officer which is clearly shown by evidence prior to this one negative event and he continues to be an outstanding leader for the Army
* PTSD was the major contributing factor in his behavior that resulted in him making the wrong decisions that resulted in his relief from command
* As evident by the findings of the Board of Inquiry the applicant proved his further service was valuable to the Army
* His performance has been nothing short of exceptional which has been reflected in his OERs
* He has more than satisfactorily served as an LTC to retire with that rank
* He has been punished enough
* He was extremely competent, a good leader, and passionate about taking care of Soldiers, their families, and the employees under his charge
* His personal destructive behavior was a result of manifested effects of PTSD associated with his service in Iraq   

9.  He provided a letter of support from his wife.  She attests:

* She has known the applicant for 21 years and in those 21 years she has known him to be kind, genuine, and dedicated in serving his country
* The Army apparently sees something different
* The AGDRB decided to retire him with a grade that is less than deserving
* The AGDRB has no idea who the applicant is
* He is a loving father to their two beautiful daughters, an adoring husband who is committed to his wife of 19 years, and an Army Infantry officer who sacrificed and continues to sacrifice both mentally and physically
* His record should speak for itself
* Determining a retirement grade of less than that of LTC does not give merit to the years of service her husband or their family had given to the Army
* Her husband is a good man who made a mistake – one mistake in his exemplary 21-year career that she believes is directly attributed to his PTSD and major depression

10.  He also provided a letter, dated 14 January 2012, from his psychiatrist.  She states the applicant has been seeing doctoral-level mental health providers from August 2009 to present for treatment of PTSD and major depressive disorder.  He has been engaged in treatment on a weekly basis and has been consistent in taking prescribed medications.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges) states a commissioned officer, in the rank of MAJ and below may retire in the highest rank served satisfactorily on active duty for 6 or more months unless entitled by law to a higher grade.  A commissioned officer must serve on active duty three years in grade to retire in rank above MAJ and below lieutenant general.  All retirements, except for disability separations, involving commissioned and warrant officers who, since their last promotion, have been the subject of any substantiated adverse finding or conclusion from an officially documented investigation, proceeding or inquiry (except minor traffic infractions) will be forwarded to Assistant Secretary of the Army (M&RA) in accordance with AR 15-80, for a grade determination, provided such information is reflected, or should be reflected by regulation, in the officer’s official military personnel file.  Examples of such findings or conclusions include, but are not limited to, a memorandum of reprimand; nonjudicial punishment under Article 15; UCMJ, court-martial, or civilian conviction.  Even if the information described above is not required to be filed in the officer’s official military personnel file, the separation authority may forward any retirement that contains information deemed substantiated, adverse, and material to determination of retired grade.

12.  Paragraph 2-3 (Automatic Grade Determinations) of Army Regulation 15-80 (Army Grade Determination Review Board and Grade Determinations) states most grade determinations do not require action by the AGDRB or the exercise of discretion by other authorities because they are automatic grade determinations that result from the operation of law and this regulation.  For example, under Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1370, an officer will normally retire at the highest grade served, unless service at that grade is deemed unsatisfactory.  

13.  Paragraph 2-5 of the regulation provides that service in the highest grade normally will be considered to have been unsatisfactory when there is sufficient unfavorable information to establish that the Soldier's service in the grade in question was unsatisfactory.

14.  Paragraph 4-1 of the regulation states an officer is not automatically entitled to retire in the highest grade served on active duty.  Instead, an officer is retired in the highest grade served on active duty satisfactorily.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests he be placed on the retired list as an LTC/O-5.
  
2.  He contends the extenuating circumstances involved with his uncharacteristic behavior were a direct result of his PTSD and major depression.  He provided a letter from his psychiatrist that states he has been undergoing treatment for PTSD and major depressive disorder since August 2009 and has been consistent in taking prescribed medications.  In addition, he claims he performed his duties as a garrison commander in an exemplary manner.  

3.  Evidence of record shows he was promoted to LTC in June 2007 and he received a GOMOR and RFC OER in 2010 for engaging in misconduct for several months while he commanded the U.S. Army Garrison-Oahu.  
Statutory and regulatory guidance is that service in a grade will not be considered to have been satisfactory when there is sufficient unfavorable information to establish that the Soldier's service in the grade in question was unsatisfactory.  There is no evidence that shows PTSD or major depression was the underlying cause of the misconduct that led to his GOMOR and relief from command.  There is insufficient evidence that would warrant overturning the decision of the AGDRB.

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)                                         AR20130002610





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130002610



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1