IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  1 OCTOBER 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150002471 


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 correction of his military service records to show –

* his correct Social Security Number (SSN)
* authorized awards
* upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge

2.  The applicant states his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) should show his SSN as "XXX-XX-X7XX," not "XXX-XX-X8XX."  It should also show that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal.  He also states that his discharge should be upgraded in accordance with Secretary of Defense, Washington, DC, memorandum, subject:  Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) because he was diagnosed with chronic PTSD.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability claim.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  A DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record – Armed Forces of the United States) shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 July 1967 for a period of 
3 years.  At the time the applicant enlisted, the U.S. Armed Forces did not use the SSN for identification; he was issued a service number.
2.  Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station, Dallas, TX, Special Orders Number 144, dated 24 July 1967, announced the applicant's enlistment in the Regular Army.  The orders show his SSN as "XXX-XX-X7XX."

3.  Special orders (SO) issued by Headquarters, Fort Polk, LA, announced award of following badges to the applicant –

* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-14) Bar 
(SO Number 231, dated 6 September 1967, as amended by SO Number 233, dated 8 September 1967)
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Machinegun (M-60) Bar (SO Number 283, Paragraph 225, dated 1 November 1967)
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Automatic Rifle (M-16) Bar (SO Number 283, Paragraph 229, dated 1 November 1967)

4.  The applicant was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).

5.  Orders issued by Headquarters, 9th Infantry Division, announced the following awards to the applicant –

* Combat Infantryman Badge (SO Number 65, dated 5 March 1968)
* Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device for heroism in the RVN on 2 March 1968 (General Orders (GO) Number 2707, dated 24 April 1968)  [The citation reads, in pertinent part, "Although blown 20 feet from his track by an explosion, [applicant] returned under intense fire to remove wounded crewmembers from the burning track and carry one to the landing zone for medical evacuation."]
* Purple Heart for wounds received in action on 7 March 1968 (GO Number 1865, dated 30 March 1968)

6.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in –

* item 31 (Foreign Service):  Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 9 January 1968 through 8 January 1969
* item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) –

* Specialist Four (SP4), E-4, Date of Rank:  18 April 1969
* Private (PV2), E-2, Date o Rank:  20 December 1969

* item 38 (Record of Assignments):  Company A, 2nd Battalion,
47th Infantry, 9th Infantry Division, from 9 January 1968 through 6 January 1969
* item 44 (Time Lost Under Section 972, Title 10 U.S. Code), he was absent without leave (AWOL) from –

* 25 October 1968 through 11 November 1968 (18 days)
* 16 February 1969 through 30 July 1969 (165 days)
* 12 August 1969 through 19 August 1969 (8 days)
* 5 September 1969 through 4 November 1969 (61 days)
* 28 February 1970 through 15 June 1970 (108 days)

7.  On 6 July 1970, the applicant was evaluated by a psychiatrist at United States Reynolds Army Hospital, Fort Sill, OK.

   a.  He determined the applicant was mentally able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and that he possessed sufficient mental capacity to act in his own behalf in administrative procedures.  He noted the applicant had no disqualifying mental or physical disease or defect sufficient to warrant discharge through medical channels.

	b.  The psychiatrist cleared the applicant for any administrative or disciplinary action.

8.  On 15 August 1970, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending him for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-212 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unfitness and Unsuitability) for reasons of unfitness.  The applicant was also advised of his rights.  

9.  On 17 August 1968, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and acknowledged he was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness.

	a.  He was advised that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life in the event a general discharge under honorable conditions were issued to him.

	b.  He was also advised that as a result of issuance of an undesirable discharge under conditions other than honorable, he might be deprived of many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws, and that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of a discharge under conditions other than honorable.

	c.  The applicant waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived personal appearance before a board of officers, waived representation by counsel, and elected not to submit statements in his own behalf.
10.  On 18 August 1968, the applicant's commander recommended the applicant be separated from the service for unfitness because of a pattern of violation of Article 86 (AWOL), Uniform Code of Military Justice, resulting in trial and conviction by one special court-martial.  He recommended the applicant receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

11.  The applicant's intermediate commander recommended approval of the proposed separation action with the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

12.  On 28 August 1970, the separation authority waived further counseling and rehabilitation requirements and approved the applicant's discharge for unfitness under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

13.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 1 September 1970.  He had completed 1 year, 10 months, and 28 days of total active service with 435 days of time lost due to AWOL and confinement.  It also shows in –

* item 3 (SSN):  "XXX-XX-X8XX"
* item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) –

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Purple Heart
* RVN Campaign Medal

14.  A review of The Adjutant General's Office, Casualty Division's Vietnam casualty roster shows the applicant as a casualty on 7 March 1968 with casualty status code 23 (hostile wounded in action; not serious, hospitalized).

15.  A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System, an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between
1965 and 1973 maintained by the Awards and Decorations Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any additional award orders pertaining to the applicant.

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning military awards and decorations.

	a.  The National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 and 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 and 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 and 30 November 1995, and 11 September 2001 and a date to be determined.

   b.  The Vietnam Service Medal is awarded to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam after 3 July 1965 through 28 March 1973.  A bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each credited campaign.  A silver service star may be worn in lieu of five bronze service stars.
	
	c.  Appendix B contains a list of Vietnam Conflict campaigns.  During the applicant's service in Vietnam, participation credit was awarded for the following campaigns –

* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III (1 June 1967- 29 January 1968)
* Tet Counteroffensive (30 January - 1 April 1968)
* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase IV (2 April - 30 June 1968)
* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V (1 July - 1 November 1968)
* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI (2 November 1968 - 22 February 1969)

	d.  The RVN Campaign Medal with Device (1960) was awarded by the Government of Vietnam to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam during the period 1 March 1961 through 28 March 1973.  Qualifying service included assignment in Vietnam for 6 months or more.
                                                                                                                                                                                                       
17.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  

   a.  It shows the 2nd Battalion, 47th Infantry, was cited for award of the –

* Valorous Unit Award

* on 31 January 1968 in Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 5, 1969
* for the period 6 May to 12 May 1968 in DAGO Number 43, 1970

* RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for the period –

* 1 December 1966 to 30 June 1968 in DAGO Number 31, 1969
* 1 July 1968 to 13 November 1968 in DAGO Number 13, 1969
* January 1969 to June 1969 in DAGO Number 59, 1969

* RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation for the period 19 December 1966 to 28 June 1969 in DAGO Number 59, 1969

   b.  This pamphlet also shows that not more than one RVN Gallantry Cross Unit Citation will be worn by any individual.  Although multiple awards of the unit citation are not authorized for wear, official military and historical records will indicate all awards received.  However, in the case of duplicate awards covering the same period of time only one award will be recorded in official military and historical records.

18.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the policy and procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness based on frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities.  It provides that when separation for unfitness was warranted, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

19.  On 23 March 1973, the Army Discharge Review Board determined the applicant was properly discharged and denied his request for a change in the type and nature of his discharge.

20.  On 27 November 1974, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records  (ABCMR) determined the applicant was properly and equitably discharged and denied his request for upgrade of his discharge to general, under honorable conditions.

   a.  On 9 August 1995, the ABCMR reconsidered his request to have his discharge upgraded to honorable.  The applicant stated that he served honorably until he was wounded in the RVN.  The traumatic event caused him to turn to drugs following his release from the hospital and assignment to a headquarters unit.  He added that his drug problem carried over to his stateside assignment.
The ABCMR determined that the applicant failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

   b.  On 4 June 1997, the ABCMR reconsidered his request (a second time) to have his discharge upgraded.  The applicant stated that he did not admit to the drug abuse which caused him to be AWOL because "unlike today's programs for substance abuse" no one in the military at that time would have admitted to drug or alcohol abuse.  He indicated that he believed, "had the programs available to today's Soldiers been available to him, he 'might have been saved'."  The ABCMR determined the applicant failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

21.  In support of his application the applicant provides the following documents:

   a.  VA Form 21-0960P-3 (Review of PTSD Disability Benefits Questionnaire), that shows in –

* Section II (Current Diagnoses) –

* Diagnosis Number 1:  PTSD, Chronic (Axis I)
* Diagnosis Number 2:  Heroin Dependence, in full sustained remission (Axis I)

* Section X (Remarks), in pertinent part:  "Given the preceding evaluation, it is reasonable to conclude that the [applicant] meets diagnostic criteria for PTSD, Chronic, and Heroin Dependence, in full sustained remission.  These diagnoses are consistent with his self-report and presentation, and account for the symptoms described."
* Section XI (Psychiatrist/Psychologist Certification and Signature), the signature of H___ H____ K____, PhD, Date Signed:  12 January 2015

   b.  Two VA Forms 21-22a (Appointments of Individual and Claimant's Representative) that show the applicant appointed D___ K. G____ as his agent, on 22 January 2015 and on 13 August 2015, and authorized him to represent him in his VA claim.

22.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 3, 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.

23.  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." 

24.  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.

25.  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. 

26.  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 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.  

27.  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.

28.  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?

29.  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.  The evidence of record shows the applicant's correct SSN was entered in his military records upon enlistment in the Regular Army.  However, it appears that during his separation processing an administrative error occurred resulting in the incorrect listing of his SSN on his DD Form 214 when he was discharged.  Thus, it would be appropriate to correct his DD Form 214 to show his correct SSN.

2.  Records show the applicant served in the RVN from 9 January 1968 through 8 January 1969.

3.  The evidence of record shows –

* GOs awarded the applicant the –

* Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device
* Purple Heart

* the applicant qualified for award of the –
   
* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal with 1 Silver Service Star (five campaigns)
* RVN Campaign Medal with Device (1960)

* SOs awarded him the –

* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Machinegun (M-60) Bar
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rife (M-14) and Automatic Rifle (M-16) Bars
   
* DAGOs awarded the applicant's unit the –

* Valorous Unit Award (1st Oak Leaf Cluster)
* RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation (3rd Award)
* RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation

4.  The applicant's discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations in effect at the time.  The characterization of the applicant's discharge was commensurate with his overall record of military service and the reason for discharge was in accordance with the governing regulations in effect at the time.

5.  At the time of his discharge in 1970, 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.

6.  Soldiers who suffered from PTSD and were separated solely for misconduct subsequent to a traumatic event warrant careful consideration for the possible recharacterization of their overall service.

7.  Records show the applicant was assigned overseas to the RVN on 9 January 1968.  On 2 March 1968, he was blown 20 feet from his track by an explosion and returned to rescue his wounded crewmembers from the burning track.  Five days later he was wounded in action (on 7 March 1968).

   a.  The evidence of record shows his periods of AWOL began in late October 1968 and continued when he was reassigned to the United States.

   b.  Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the traumatic events he experienced in the RVN resulted in his subsequent continuous period of AWOL that led to his discharge.

8.  The applicant accepted an undesirable discharge. 

9.  The medical evidence of record shows the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD/PTSD-related symptoms by a competent mental health professional.  Therefore, it is reasonable to believe the applicant's PTSD condition existed during the period of service that is under review. 
10.  Thus, 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 with an effective date of 18 April 1968.

11.  Therefore, in view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant's 1 September 1970 DD Form 214, as recommended below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___x____  ___x____  ____x___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  Notwithstanding the staff DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS above, the Board unanimously determined that the evidence presented was 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 amending the applicant's 1 September 1970 DD Form 214 to show:

   a.  the Social Security Number as shown on Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station, Dallas, TX, Special Orders Number 144, dated 24 July 1967;
	
   b.   the following awards and decorations –

* Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device
* Purple Heart
* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal with 1 Silver Service Star
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960)
* Valorous Unit Award (1st Oak Leaf Cluster)
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation 
(3rd Award)
* Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Machinegun (M-60) Bar
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rife (M-14) and Automatic Rifle (M-16) Bars

   c.   service in the RVN from 9 January 1968 through 8 January 1969.  
   
2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  The Board noted that the evidence of record indicates 435 days of lost time due AWOL and confinement and that the applicant developed a heroin addiction while serving in Vietnam.  The Board also noted the events in combat that allegedly triggered PTSD.  As cited above, research has shown PTSD is not a likely cause for either premeditated misconduct or misconduct that continues for an extended period of time.  The level of repeated misconduct that led to the discharge he received cannot be excused or erased by a PTSD diagnosis 45 years later.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to an upgrade of the applicant's under other than honorable conditions 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)                                         AR20150002471



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150002471



15


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1