IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE: 19 March 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150001444 


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, in effect, an upgrade of his under conditions other than honorable (UCOTH) discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  He was 17 years old when he enlisted in the Army.  One month into basic training a sergeant, who recently had returned from Vietnam, shot himself in his room.  Everyone witnessed the aftermath because the door was left open.

	b.  After basic and advanced individual training he was stationed at Fort Lewis, Washington.  There he decided to volunteer for Vietnam.  His two friends also volunteered for Vietnam.  

	c.  His two friends received orders for Vietnam, but his orders were for Korea.  Apparently his parents had called someone and because the applicant was an only child he couldn't go to Vietnam.  He felt he had disgraced the Army, his family, and himself.

	d.  Once in Korea he started serious drinking and smoking marijuana.  He kept in contact with the two friends and one day he received notice that one of them was killed in action.  The applicant began to smoke opium and get into trouble.  The applicant's then-first sergeant helped him out by stopping the company commander from having him discharged.  

	e.   He held his parents responsible and from age 17 until 56 he had very little contact with them.  They both died when he was 56 years old.

	f.  After Korea, he was stationed at Fort Riley, Kansas, and basically stopped drinking, but he did not stop the drug use.  He thought about suicide and made one serious attempt to kill himself.  He continued to get into trouble and ended up with an undesirable discharge when he was 19 years old.  He was told he could have the discharge changed to a general after 10 years; without that information, he wouldn't have signed it.  He had less than six months left on his enlistment.  He asked for help in Korea and at Fort Riley, but none was provided. 

g.  Years after his discharge he was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  He is now 65 years old and changing his discharge won't take everything away, but at least it will allow him to die with some respect.

3.  The applicant provides:

* his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge)
* a letter from Dr A____ K____, Mid Coast Medical Group Primary Care, Brunswick, Maine, dated 12 January 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 June 1967.  He held military occupational specialty 72C (Telecommunications Switchboard Operator).



3.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in:

	a.  item 31 (Overseas Service) he served in Korea from 16 May 1968 through 18 June 1969;

	b.  item 38 (Record of Assignments) that while in Korea he served in his MOS  in the 304th Signal Battalion;

	c.  item 41 (Awards and Decorations) he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (Korea); and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar; and

	d.  item 44 (Time Lost) several entries totaling 127 days.

4.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on the following occasions:

* 14 November 1967, for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 
1 November to 3 November 1967
* 4 December 1968, for wrongfully and unlawfully entering into a financial contract and giving his ration cards as security for a loan
* 14 January 1969, for being AWOL from 11 January to 12 January 1969
* 31 December 1969, for being AWOL from 17 September to 21 November 1969 and from 20 December to 30 December 1969

5.  On 26 March 1970, charges were preferred against the applicant for being AWOL from 4 February to 25 March 1970.

6.  He consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He acknowledged he understood the elements of the charges against him and admitted he was guilty of at least one of the offenses which authorized a punitive discharge.  He also acknowledged he understood he might receive a discharge under conditions other than honorable, which would deprive him of many or all Army benefits, and he might be ineligible for veteran’s benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA).  He acknowledged he understood he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he were issued an under other than honorable discharge.  He also indicated he had received legal advice, but his request for discharge had been made voluntarily and it reflected his own free will.  He elected to not submit a statement in his own behalf.

7.   His immediate commander, battalion commander, and brigade commander  recommended approval of the separation with issuance of a dishonorable discharge.

8.  The separation authority approved the discharge request and directed issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

9.  On 30 June 1970, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10.  He had completed 2 years, 8 months, and 11 days of active duty service.  His 
DD Form 214 shows 127 days of time lost.

10.  There is no indication he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge.

11.  He provided a letter from Dr. A____ K____, Mid Coast Medical Group Primary Care, Brunswick, Maine, dated 12 January 2015.  The Dr. states, "[The applicant] was evaluated on January 8, 2015.  I have known him as a patient for a few years.  His history and symptoms are consistent with diagnosis of PTSD, depression and anxiety."

12.  His medical records are not available for review.  The available records are void of and he failed to provide evidence showing he was diagnosed with PTSD while on active duty.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an undesirable discharge is normally considered appropriate.

	b.  Paragraph 3-7a states 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.

	c.  Paragraph 3-7b states 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.

14.  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." 

15.  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.

16.  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) 

		(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.

		(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. 

		(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.

		(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).

		(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.

		(6)  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. 

17.  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 (UOTHC) 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.  

18.  In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards 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.

19.  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?

20.  Although the 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 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.  His military record does not contain documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms.

2.  The letter he provided from a primary care doctor is not considered as documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms rendered by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider.

3.  His service medical records are not available for review.  The available records are void of and he failed to provide evidence showing he was diagnosed with PTSD as a result of his service.

4.  His request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with legal counsel, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial and the punitive discharge he might have received.  His service was appropriately characterized by the nature of his offenses and the circumstances of his separation and does not warrant an upgrade to either an honorable or a general discharge.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant an upgrade of his discharge.

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 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)                                         AR20140008261



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150001444



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1