IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:  28 April 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140015124 


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:

	a.  Correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show his social security number (SSN) as 2XX-7X-3XXX.

	b.  An upgrade of his undesirable discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  His SSN is incorrect.

	b.  He would like to apply for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits.

	c.  In 1966, he enlisted in the Army and became a paratrooper.  After arriving in Vietnam, he soon realized that no amount of training could prepare him for what he experienced there.  He could handle the jungle, snakes, spiders, booby traps, heat and humidity, torrents of rain, and foot rot from scabs and cuts that got infected from moisture and dirt.

	d.  His biggest problem was the enemy.  The enemy was everywhere.  They were in the trees, under the ground, they were hidden in heavy vegetation, and they would shoot until there was no one left or until they were able to retreat.  They couldn't tell the Viet Cong from the villagers.

	e.  They encountered Agent Orange, gunfire, and bombings.  He was injured several times.  Explosions went off near him and he was hit by shrapnel.  He had shrapnel in his leg, jaw, testicles, and wrist.  In a second explosion, he injured his other arm.

	f.  In 1969 when his tour was over, he did not return to the United States the same man.  Not only did he have visible scars, he had mental scars.  He had terrible nightmares.  He would often awaken disoriented and confused.  He struggled with anger, anxiety, and depression.  He turned to illicit drugs to try to keep pain at bay, bestow a sense of mental calm, and alleviate the stress and anxiety.  The horrors of this war led many Soldiers into a fog of drugs just to cope.

	g.  Back then there wasn't a lot of talk about post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and people weren’t very accepting of the fact that drug abuse was a disease.  His mental state was fragile, he was depressed and suffering from PTSD.  After returning from Vietnam, he decided he would not return to the military and he was absent without leave (AWOL).

	h.  PTSD and Agent Orange weren't researched and understood as well back then like they are now.

	i.  He has been diagnosed with PTSD, high blood pressure, diabetes, and depression by the VA.

	j.  He was scared, confused, hurt, and suicidal.  He was depressed and suffering from PTSD.  One day after returning from Vietnam he decided he would not return to the military and was AWOL.  He wasn't himself.

3.  The applicant provides:

* social security card
* DD Form 214
* letter from a Member of Congress, dated 19 February 2015

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 was born on 27 February 1948.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 November 1966 for 3 years.  He served as a light weapons infantryman in Vietnam from 1 December 1967 to 31 December 1968.

3.  Headquarters, 101st Air Cavalry Division, General Orders Number 4247, dated 1 August 1968, awarded him the Army Commendation Medal.  These orders show his SSN as 2XX-7X-3XXX.

4.  Headquarters, 101st Air Cavalry Division, General Orders Number 10652, dated 13 December 1968, awarded him the Air Medal.  These orders show his SSN as 2XX-7X-3XXX.

5.  On 15 May 1969, he was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 4 April 1969 to 14 April 1969.

6.  Records show he was AWOL from:

* 10 February 1969 to 17 February 1969
* 25 June 1969 to 29 November 1973

7.  He was arrested by civil authorities on 30 November 1973 and charged with robbery, forgery, and unlawful delivery of a controlled substance.  In September 1974, he was convicted of the charges by the Court of Common Pleas, Harrisburg, PA, and he was sentenced to confinement for 1 1/2 to 5 years.

8.  On 16 October 1974, he was notified of his pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations – Discharge – Misconduct) due to conviction by a civil court.

9.  On 31 October 1974, he waived his rights, indicated he did not intend to appeal his conviction, and acknowledged that he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a discharge under other than honorable conditions were issued to him.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

10.  On 12 December 1974, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

11.  He was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 23 December 1974 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 due to conviction by a civil court.  He completed 2 years, 6 months, and 24 days of total active service with 2,033 days of lost time.

12.  Item 3 (SSN) of his DD Form 214 shows his SSN as 5XX-6X-5XXX.  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded or authorized the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960)
* two overseas service bars

13.  He provided a copy of his social security card that shows his SSN as 
2XX-7X-3XXX. 

14.  There is no evidence showing the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD or any other mental condition prior to his discharge or that he has a current diagnosis of PTSD.

15.  There is no indication the applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

16.  Army Regulation 635-206, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct (fraudulent entry, conviction by civil court, and absence without leave or desertion).  It provided for the elimination of enlisted personnel for misconduct when they were initially convicted by civil authorities or action was taken against them which was tantamount to a finding of guilty for an offense for which the maximum penalty under the Uniform Code of Military Justice was death or confinement in excess of 1 year.  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

17.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic policy for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 3-7a 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 member's 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.

	b.  Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

18.  PTSD can occur after someone goes through a traumatic event like combat, assault, or disaster.  The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and provides standard criteria and common language for the classification of mental disorders.  In 1980, the APA added PTSD to the third edition of its DSM nosologic classification scheme.  Although controversial when first introduced, the PTSD diagnosis has filled an important gap in psychiatric theory and practice.  From a historical perspective, the significant change ushered in by the PTSD concept was the stipulation that the etiological agent was outside the individual (i.e., a traumatic event) rather than an inherent individual weakness (i.e., a traumatic neurosis).  The key to understanding the scientific basis and clinical expression of PTSD is the concept of "trauma."

19.  PTSD is unique among psychiatric diagnoses because of the great importance placed upon the etiological agent, the traumatic stressor.  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.  Clinical experience with the PTSD diagnosis has shown, however, that there are individual differences regarding the capacity to cope with catastrophic stress.  Therefore, while most people exposed to traumatic events do not develop PTSD, others go on to develop the full-blown syndrome.  Such observations have prompted the recognition that trauma, like pain, is not an external phenomenon that can be completely objectified.  Like pain, the traumatic experience is filtered through cognitive and emotional processes before it can be appraised as an extreme threat.  Because of individual differences in this appraisal process, different people appear to have different trauma thresholds, some more protected from and some more vulnerable to developing clinical symptoms after exposure to extremely stressful situations.

20.  The fifth edition of the DSM was released in May 2013.  This revision includes changes to the diagnostic criteria for PTSD and acute stress disorder.  The PTSD diagnostic criteria were revised to take into account things that have been learned from scientific research and clinical experience.  The revised diagnostic criteria for PTSD include a history of exposure to a traumatic event that meets specific stipulations and symptoms from each of four symptom clusters:  intrusion, avoidance, negative alterations in cognitions and mood, and alterations in arousal and reactivity.  The sixth criterion concerns duration of symptoms, the seventh criterion assesses functioning, and the eighth criterion clarifies symptoms as not attributable to a substance or co-occurring medical condition.

	a.  Criterion A – Stressor:  The person was exposed to:  death, threatened death, actual or threatened serious injury, or actual or threatened sexual violence, as follows (one required):

		(1)  direct exposure;

		(2)  witnessing, in person;

		(3)  indirectly, by learning that a close relative or close friend was exposed to trauma.  If the event involved actual or threatened death, it must have been violent or accidental; or

		(4)  repeated or extreme indirect exposure to aversive details of the event(s), usually in the course of professional duties (e.g., first responders collecting body parts, professionals repeatedly exposed to details of child abuse).  This does not include indirect non-professional exposure through electronic media, television, movies, or pictures.

	b.  Criterion B – Intrusion Symptoms:  The traumatic event is persistently re-experienced in the following way(s) (one required):

		(1)  recurrent, involuntary, and intrusive memories;

		(2)  traumatic nightmares;

		(3)  dissociative reactions (e.g., flashbacks) which may occur on a continuum from brief episodes to complete loss of consciousness;

		(4)  intense or prolonged distress after exposure to traumatic reminders; or

		(5)  marked physiologic reactivity after exposure to trauma-related stimuli.

	c.  Criterion C – Avoidance:  Persistent effortful avoidance of distressing trauma-related stimuli after the event (one required):

		(1)  trauma-related thoughts or feelings or

		(2)  trauma-related external reminders (e.g., people, places, conversations, activities, objects, or situations).

	d.  Criterion D – Negative Alterations in Cognitions and Mood:  Negative alterations in cognitions and mood that began or worsened after the traumatic event (two required):

		(1)  inability to recall key features of the traumatic event (usually dissociative amnesia; not due to head injury, alcohol, or drugs);

		(2)  persistent (and often distorted) negative beliefs and expectations about oneself or the world (e.g., "I am bad," "The world is completely dangerous");

		(3)  persistent distorted blame of self or others for causing the traumatic event or for resulting consequences;

		(4)  persistent negative trauma-related emotions (e.g., fear, horror, anger, guilt, or shame);

		(5)  markedly diminished interest in (pre-traumatic) significant activities, feeling alienated from others (e.g., detachment or estrangement); and

		(6)  constricted affect, persistent inability to experience positive emotions.

	e.  Criterion E – Alterations in Arousal and Reactivity:  Trauma-related alterations in arousal and reactivity that began or worsened after the traumatic event (two required):

		(1)  irritable or aggressive behavior;

		(2)  self-destructive or reckless behavior;

		(3)  hypervigilance;

		(4)  exaggerated startle response;

		(5)  problems in concentration; and

		(6)  sleep disturbance.

	f.  Criterion F – Duration:  Persistence of symptoms (in Criteria B, C, D, and E) for more than 1 month.

	g.  Criterion G – Functional Significance:  Significant symptom-related distress or functional impairment (e.g., social, occupational).

	h.  Criterion H – Exclusion:  Disturbance is not due to medication, substance use, or other illness.

21.  As a result of the extensive research conducted by the medical community and the relatively recent issuance of revised criteria regarding the causes, diagnosis, and treatment of PTSD, the Department of Defense (DOD) acknowledges that some Soldiers who were administratively discharged under other than honorable conditions may have had an undiagnosed condition of PTSD at the time of their discharge.  It is also acknowledged that in some cases this undiagnosed condition of PTSD may have been a mitigating factor in the Soldiers' misconduct which served as a catalyst for their discharge.  Research has also shown that misconduct stemming from PTSD is typically based upon a spur of the moment decision resulting from a temporary lapse in judgment; therefore, PTSD is not a likely cause for either premeditated misconduct or misconduct that continues for an extended period of time.

22.  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 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 civilian healthcare provider in order to determine if it would be appropriate to upgrade the characterization of the applicants' service.

23.  BCM/NRs are not courts, nor are they investigative agencies.  Therefore, the determinations will be based upon a thorough review of the available military records and the evidence provided by each applicant on a case-by-case basis.  When determining if PTSD was the causative factor for an applicant's misconduct and whether an upgrade is warranted, the following factors must be carefully considered:

* is it reasonable to determine that PTSD or PTSD-related conditions existed at the time of discharge?
* does the applicant's record contain documentation of the occurrence of a traumatic event during the period of service?
* does the applicant's military record contain documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms?
* did the applicant provide documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms rendered by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider?
* was the applicant's condition determined to have existed prior to military service?
* was the applicant's condition determined to be incurred during or aggravated by military service?
* do mitigating factors exist in the applicant's case?
* did the applicant have a history of misconduct prior to the occurrence of the traumatic event?
* was the applicant's misconduct premeditated?
* how serious was the misconduct?

24.  Although DOD acknowledges that some Soldiers who were administratively discharged UOTHC may have had an undiagnosed condition of PTSD at the time of their discharge, it is presumed that they were properly discharged based upon the evidence that was available at the time.  Conditions documented in the records that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge.  In cases in which PTSD or PTSD-related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service.  BCM/NRs will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat-related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct.  PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct.  BCM/NRs will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct.
 
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's 1968 Air Medal and Army Commendation Medal orders show his SSN as 2XX-7X-3XXX, the same SSN shown on his social security card.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to correct his SSN on his DD Form 214 and add these awards to his DD Form 214 as a related issue.

2.  He wants his discharge upgraded so he can receive veterans' benefits.  However, a discharge is not changed solely for the purpose of qualifying an applicant for veterans' benefits.  Each request is individually considered based on the evidence presented.

3.  Although he contends he suffers from PTSD, there is no medical evidence of record and he provided no medical evidence showing he was diagnosed with PTSD.  There is insufficient evidence to show PTSD symptoms were attributed to his military service or were a causative factor in the misconduct resulting to his discharge.

4.  His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  He signed a statement indicating that he did not intend to appeal his civil conviction.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

5.  His record of service included one special court-martial conviction and 2,033 days of lost time.  He also committed a serious civil offense while serving in the Army.  As a result, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.

6.  In view of the foregoing information, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant an honorable or a general discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X___  ____X___  ____X___ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  deleting the current entry in item 3 of his DD Form 214 and replacing it with the SSN shown on his social security card; and

	b.  adding award of the Air Medal and Army Commendation Medal to his DD Form 214.

2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to upgrading his undesirable discharge.



      ___________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)                                         AR20140015124



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140015124



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1