IN THE CASE OF:  	  

		BOARD DATE:  12 February 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140019425 


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 an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a fully honorable discharge. 

2.  The applicant states he had post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that was not diagnosed. 

3.  The applicant provides: 

* Character reference letter, dated 4 March 2008
* Document regarding discharge upgrades
* Chronological Records of Medical Care, dated in 1970
* Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination), dated 23 June 1970
* Narrative Summary, dated 11 October 1968
* Self-authored statement to the Army Discharge Review Board, dated 4 April 2000
* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), dated 30 September 1971 and 18 January 1969
* Medical statement, dated 30 November 2011, from a medical doctor
* Medical statement, dated 16 December 2011, from a licensed clinical psychologist 
* Mental Health Services statement, dated 2 June 1977 
* Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Progress Notes, dated September 2014 
* VA Clinical Assessment report, dated October 2014
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 AC85-03104, dated 24 July 1985. 

2.  The applicant does not meet the criteria for a request for reconsideration because his request was not received within 1 year of the Board's original decision.  However, in view of the Secretary of Defense's Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming PTSD, his request warrants consideration by the Board as an exception to policy.

3.  The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 May 1966 and he held military occupational specialty (MOS) 13A (Field Artillery).  

4.  On 10 January 1967, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. 

5.  He served in Korea from around March 1967 to around December 1967 and in Vietnam from around December 1967 to around January 1969.  

6.  On 28 October 1968, in Vietnam, he accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ for wrongfully appropriating a 1/4th ton truck.  He was reduced to E-2. 

7.  He was honorably discharged on 18 January 1969 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve.  His DD Form 214 shows he completed 2 years, 7 months, and 23 days of active service.  He was awarded or authorized the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Campaign Medal
* Army Commendation Medal
* Parachutist Badge
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Bronze Star Medal

8.  He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 14 April 1969.  

9.  On 16 August 1969, he departed his unit in an absent without leave (AWOL) status and on 18 September 1969, he was dropped from the Army rolls as a deserter.  He ultimately returned to military control on 13 January 1970.  

10.  On 29 January 1970, he was convicted by a special court-martial of one specification of being AWOL from 16 August 1969 to 13 January 1970.  The court sentenced him to forfeiture of pay, detention, and restriction. 

11.  Special Orders Number 300, issued by Headquarters, 4th Battalion, 80th Artillery, Fort Carson, on 20 October 1970, promoted him to specialist four (SP4)/E-4.

12.  On 3 May 1971, he departed his unit in an AWOL status and on or about 3 June 1971, he was dropped from the Army rolls as a deserter.  He ultimately returned to military control on or about 31 August 1971 and he was placed in pre-trial confinement at Fort Ord pending disposition of his case. 

13.  The complete facts and circumstances, including the court-martial charge sheet and separation packet, are not available for review with this case.  However, his records contain:

       a.  Special Orders Number 246, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center, Fort Ord, CA, on 3 September 1971, showing he returned to military control from AWOL status on 1 September 1971 and he was assigned to the Personnel Control Facility, Fort Ord. 

       b.  A duly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 30 September 1971 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, in lieu of a court-martial with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  This form also shows he completed 1 year, 7 months, and 29 days of creditable active service during this period and he had 298 days of lost time. 

14.  On an unknown date, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed his discharge but found it proper and equitable.  Therefore, the ADRB denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.  

15.  On 24 July 1985, the ABCMR also considered his discharge but found it proper and as such denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.  

16.  He provides (PTSD-related documents): 

      a.  Medical document, dated 30 November 2011, wherein a doctor stated the applicant met the criteria for Major Depression and Panic Disorder.  He frequently reflected back on his time in Vietnam, reporting periods of memory loss and periods he could not account for during that time.  He was struggling with depression, lack of motivation, difficulty sleeping, hopelessness, and worthlessness.   

      b.  Medical document, dated 16 December 2011, from a licensed clinical psychologist who opines the applicant has been suffering from the aftermath of PTSD with persistent symptoms.  

      c.  VA progress notes, dated September 2014, showing a diagnosis of Generalized Anxiety Disorder, PTSD, and Adjustment Disorder with Depression. 

17.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge, could submit a request for discharge for the good of the service at any time after court-martial charges were preferred.  Commanders would ensure that an individual was not coerced into submitting a request for discharge for the good of the service.  Consulting counsel would advise the member concerning the elements of the offense or offenses charged, type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of Veterans Administration benefits, and the possibility of prejudice in civilian life because of the characterization of such a discharge.  An Undesirable Discharge Certificate would normally be furnished an individual who was discharged for the good of the Service.

       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 it 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-III nosologic classification scheme.  Although controversial when first introduced, the PTSD diagnosis has filled an important gap in psychiatric theory and practice.
From an 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 DSM fifth revision (DSM-5) 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 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) 

* Direct exposure 
* Witnessing, in person
* 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
* 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) 

* Recurrent, involuntary, and intrusive memories 
* Traumatic nightmares 
* Dissociative reactions (e.g., flashbacks) which may occur on a continuum from brief episodes to complete loss of consciousness 
* Intense or prolonged distress after exposure to traumatic reminders 
* 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)

* Trauma-related thoughts or feelings
* 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)

* Inability to recall key features of the traumatic event (usually dissociative amnesia; not due to head injury, alcohol, or drugs)
* Persistent (and often distorted) negative beliefs and expectations about oneself or the world (e.g., "I am bad," "The world is completely dangerous")
* Persistent distorted blame of self or others for causing the traumatic event or for resulting consequences
* Persistent negative trauma-related emotions (e.g., fear, horror, anger, guilt, or shame)
* Markedly diminished interest in (pre-traumatic) significant activities
* Feeling alienated from others (e.g., detachment or estrangement)
* 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)

* Irritable or aggressive behavior
* Self-destructive or reckless behavior
* Hypervigilance
* Exaggerated startle response
* Problems in concentration
* Sleep disturbance

	f.  Criterion F, duration:  Persistence of symptoms (in Criteria B, C, D, and E) for more than one 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 Soldier's 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 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.  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 civilian healthcare provider in order to determine if it would be appropriate to upgrade the characterization of the applicant's 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 the 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 presumed that they were properly discharged based upon the evidence that was available at the time.  Conditions documented in the record 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 UOTHC characterization of service.  Corrections Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service of UOTHC.  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.  Corrections Boards 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 record is void of the complete facts and circumstances that led to his discharge.  However, his record contains a properly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows he was discharged on 30 September 1971 under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 in lieu of a trial by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 

2.  The issuance of a discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, required the applicant to voluntarily, willingly, and in writing request discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  It is presumed that all requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.  The applicant provided no information that would indicate the contrary.  Further, it is presumed that the applicant's discharge accurately reflects his overall record of service.

3.  Nevertheless, at the time of the applicant's discharge, PTSD was largely unrecognized by the medical community and DoD.  However, both the medical community and DoD now have a more thorough understanding of PTSD and its potential to serve as a causative factor in a Soldier's misconduct when the condition is not diagnosed and treated in a timely fashion.  Soldiers who suffered from PTSD and were separated solely for misconduct subsequent to a traumatic event warrant careful consideration for the possible re-characterization of their overall service.

4.  A review of the applicant's record and the evidence that he provided shows that he was subjected to the ordeals of war while serving in Vietnam.  Although his misconduct began prior to even arriving in Vietnam, it became more serious after his return from Vietnam.  Years later and subsequent to his Vietnam experiences, medical evidence shows he was diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional.  Therefore, it is reasonable to believe the applicant's PTSD condition existed at the time of discharge. 

5.  It is concluded that the PTSD conditions were a causative factor in the misconduct that led to the discharge.  After carefully weighing that fact against the severity of the applicant's misconduct, there is sufficient mitigating evidence to warrant upgrading the characterization of the applicant's service to a general discharge under honorable conditions and restoring his rank/grade to SP4/E-4 (the last rank/grade he held at the time of his separation) with an effective date of 30 September 1971.

6.  He is not entitled to an honorable discharge because an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles and 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 meritorious.  Based on his extensive history of AWOL, NJP, and court-martial conviction, his service clearly does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct also renders his service unsatisfactory.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

____X___  ____X___  ____X___ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant amendment of the ABCMR’s decision in Docket Number AC85-03104, dated 24 July 1985.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by re-issuing the applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 September 1971 to show the characterization of service as "General, Under Honorable Conditions" and his rank/grade as SP4/E-4 with an effective date of 30 September 1971.

2.  The Board further determined that 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 how the characterization of service as "Honorable."



      ____________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)                                         AR20140019425



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140019425



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1