IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 November 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150010821 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ____X____ ___X_____ ____X____ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 November 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150010821 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant amendment of the ABCMR's decision in Docket Number AR20100027472, dated 31 May 2011. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. re-issuing the applicant’s DD Form 214, for the period ending on 9 June 2005, with his character of service shown as general, under honorable conditions; and b. restoring the applicant's rank/pay grade to specialist/E-4, effective 9 June 2005. 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable 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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 November 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150010821 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 previous request for an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to an honorable discharge. He indicates he desires to appear before the Board. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he joined the military in 2002 at the age of 17. He descends from a long family history of veterans serving in several areas of combat. When he joined the military, it was the proudest day of his life. He was on the ground in Iraq fighting a war he never expected to fight 8 months after he joined the military. He was young at that time, but he was happy to be in theater. He volunteered to stay in theater longer so the rest of his unit could go home to their families. Additionally, he states: a. He remained with the equipment then he took the ship back to the United States. While tightening cargo chains on the lower deck of the ship, he fell 10 feet and injured his back. He returned to Fort Polk, LA, joined his unit, and started having problems sleeping. He went months without a full night's sleep due to dreams and nightmares of Iraq. b. He smelled the scent of Iraq for months after returning to the United States and he had a hard time being in public places. He tried to talk to his squad leader about the things he was experiencing, but no one listened to him. c. Medical personnel prescribed him medicine and he had a thin grasp on normal life. He informed military personnel that he had a problem with prescription pills. d. The Army investigated him; he was put in an interrogation room for hours separate from his wife, who was also being interrogated. Army personnel did not allow him to leave and he did not understand what was happening. Afterward, he was asked to sign a bunch of papers. At that time, he just wanted to see his wife and go home. He was already in the process of being discharged for his back injury and had seen several doctors about his dreams. e. Finally, he was told that he could get out of the military. He did not care how; he just wanted out. He accepted a discharge in-lieu of court-martial because he did not see another way out. He served his full 3 years by this time and he never got in any trouble. To this day, he wishes he would have done things differently, but he still does not understand how he could have asked for help and not have received it. f. The past 10 years, he has suffered from PTSD and has not had a single good night's sleep. He has managed to live his life, be a productive member of society, and live by the lessons he learned from his military service. Every day he is proud to be a veteran regardless of what is reflected on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). He knows he served his country with honor. He believes those who had the responsibility to help a Soldier let him down and refused to look at the reasons behind everything. 3. The applicant provides: * two DA Forms 2823 (Sworn Statement), dated 17 November 2004 * memorandum, subject: Recommendation for Separation Under Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 5, Paragraph 5-13 (Personality Disorder), dated 19 November 2004 * DD Form 214 for the period ending 9 June 2005 * two character references, dated 25 and 26 October 2007 * letter from the Medical Director, Northern Berkshire HealthCare, dated 6 February 2008 * memorandum, subject: Request for Review and Upgrade of Discharge, dated 16 May 2008 * Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings, dated 31 May 2011 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 ABCMR in Docket Number AR20100027472 on 31 May 2011. 2. The applicant provides new evidence and argument that warrant consideration by the Board. 3. The applicant was born on 25 August 1984 and he enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 May 2002 at the age of 17. 4. He served in Iraq from 6 February 2003 through 9 August 2003. 5. On 24 August 2004, he underwent a mental health evaluation and was diagnosed with bipolar disorder (adolescent onset), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (childhood onset), and personality disorder. 6. On 12 October 2004, separation action was initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13, for personality disorder. 7. He provided a sworn statement, dated 17 November 2004, wherein he admitted he made a false report to the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command Division (USACIDC, also known as CID) so that he could get more medication. He was addicted to prescription drugs, he had obtained prescription drugs under false pretenses, and he abused illicit drugs while in the Army. He also asked his wife to lie for him and he sold drugs while in the Army. 8. He provided a memorandum, dated 19 November 2004, which states the recommendation for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13, for personality disorder was approved. 9. On 27 April 2005, charges were preferred against him for making a false official statement, impeding an investigation, obtaining under false pretenses prescription pills, distributing ecstasy, using ecstasy, wrongfully possessing Percocet, and using marijuana. 10. On 13 May 2005, he consulted with counsel and he requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service – in lieu of court-martial. He indicated that by submitting his request for discharge he acknowledged he was guilty of a charge against him that authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He indicated in his request that he understood he might be discharged under conditions other than honorable and furnished an under other than honorable conditions discharge, that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), that he would be deprived of many or all Army benefits, and that he might be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws. He acknowledged that he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He elected not to make a statement in his own behalf. 11. On 25 May 2005, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 12. He was discharged on 9 June 2005 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service – in lieu of trial by court-martial. He had served a total of 3 years, 1 month, and 3 days of creditable active service. 13. On 20 September 2006, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for a discharge upgrade. 14. He provided letters from his mother and grandmother who described his behavior after his deployment to Iraq. They stated that he had no interest in doing anything; had a difficult time communicating with others; did not enjoy spending time with family; was angry all the time; had difficulty holding a job; was anxious, irritable, stressed, and depressed; had difficulty sleeping; had nightmares and night sweats, and had yelling outbursts in his sleep. 15. A letter from the Medical Director of Psychiatry, Northern Berkshire HealthCare, dated 6 February 2008, informed a representative at Veterans Services that the applicant had been under his medical care from 27 to 29 January 2008. a. The psychiatrist stated the applicant was admitted to this facility for diagnostic assessment and stabilization following an over-ingestion of prescribed medications. The most prominent symptoms included intrusive and distressing recollections of events he experienced during his exposure to combat in Iraq during his military service, recurrent distressing dreams of these events, intense psychological distress at exposure to cues that represent these events, and physiological reactivity (changes to heart rate, blood pressure, sweating) when thinking about these events. b. The psychiatrist also stated the applicant persistently attempted to avoid thoughts and feelings associated with his combat experience, displayed a markedly diminished participation in activities that were previously meaningful to him, felt detached from others and displayed a restricted range of affect. These symptoms have resulted in the applicant having difficulty sleeping, difficulty concentrating, having an increased level of irritability, and feeling hypervigilant or that he must constantly be "on guard." c. The psychiatrist further stated that these disturbances caused significant impairment in the applicant's social and occupational functioning in that his interpersonal relationships with significant others, including a young son, are strained and he has been unable to work. d. Based on the psychiatrist's opinion, the applicant suffers from PTSD, chronic with delayed onset, as a direct result of his exposure to combat in Iraq while serving in the U.S. military. e. The applicant reported that he ingested narcotics and benzodiazepines because there was "so much in my head…I was trying not to remember anything about the war." He denied this ingestion was a suicide attempt and available clinical information during this hospitalization supported his assertion that this was an accidental over-ingestion. f. The psychiatrist prescribed the applicant medication for anxiety, nightmares, PTSD, depressive symptoms, and continued chronic back pain. g. The psychiatrist stated the applicant was not able to hold a job due to his incapacitating PTSD symptoms and not able to meet family or interpersonal obligations. 16. He provided a letter, dated 16 May 2008 from a Director/Agent of the Department of Veterans Services in Adams, MA, who stated: a. The applicant's problems started shortly after he returned from Iraq when he injured his back and became addicted to painkillers. At the time of the applicant's back injury, he suffered from undiagnosed PTSD and this office believed this was a major contributing factor in his addiction. b. The applicant's addiction was a subconscious attempt to self-medicate. The official stated his addiction and undiagnosed PTSD caused a powerful need to obtain drugs even if it was illegal. The applicant's duty in Iraq changed his personality as stated in his mother's letter. c. The applicant was in the process of getting a divorce and his PTSD was at least partly responsible for the break up. The applicant signed the sworn statement at Fort Polk without counsel. If counsel had been provided an evaluation for PTSD would have been requested and a diagnosis obtained. d. It was requested that the applicant be evaluated and treated by the VA for PTSD. The applicant's PTSD is from service in Iraq and proceeded his addiction and UOTHC discharge. 17. On 12 September 2016, an advisory opinion was provided by a psychiatrist within the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA). The psychiatrist opined: a. The Department of Defense electronic medical record (AHLTA) was reviewed and contained no information regarding any behavioral health condition. b. The ABCMR’s initial report shows that on 24 August 2004, the applicant was diagnosed with bipolar disorder (adolescent onset), ADHD (attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder childhood onset), and personality disorder. In October 2004, separation action was initiated against the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13 for personality disorder. This separation action was approved on 19 November 2004, but it was suspended when the applicant was charged with the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. c. Based on a review of available information, there is evidence that the applicant suffers from service-related PTSD. The most convincing documentation submitted by the applicant is a statement from his psychiatrist of Northern Berkshire Healthcare. The psychiatrist at Northern Berkshire Healthcare listed the applicant's symptoms of PTSD and felt the applicant's PTSD was severe and chronic. The Northern Berkshire Healthcare psychiatrist felt the applicant's drug use was due to his PTSD. Statements from the applicant's family members also document that he returned from Iraq a changed, angry, irritable man. d. Based on the information available at this time, it appears the applicant has a behavioral health condition, PTSD due to combat, which is mitigating for some, but not all of the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. The applicant likely had undiagnosed PTSD while on active duty. Because PTSD can be associated with the use of illicit drugs for self-medication, there is likely a nexus between the applicant's use of marijuana, MDMA (ecstasy), prescription pain pills, and the PTSD. However, PTSD is not associated with making a false official statement, impeding an investigation, obtaining drugs under false pretenses, or distributing drugs. 18. ARBA forwarded a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant to allow him the opportunity to provide comments; however, he did not respond within the allotted timeframe. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth 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, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. b. Paragraph 5-13b (Separation because of personality disorder) states commanders will not take action prescribed in this chapter in lieu of disciplinary action solely to spare a Soldier who may have committed serious acts of misconduct for which harsher penalties may be imposed under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). c. 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. d. 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. 2. 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 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." 3. 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. 4. The DSM Fifth Revision (DSM-V) 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; 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); or (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; or (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. 5. 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 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. 6. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. Paragraph 2-11 states applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. DISCUSSION: 1. The evidence of record confirms that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the applicant's rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. 2. The evidence of record shows the applicant underwent a mental health evaluation on 24 August 2004 and he was diagnosed with bipolar disorder (adolescent onset), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (childhood onset), and personality disorder. 3. The evidence of record shows separation action was initiated against the applicant in October 2004 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph 5-13 for personality disorder. This separation action was approved on 19 November 2004 but was suspended when the applicant was charged with the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. 4. Additionally, the applicant’s record shows he admitted he was guilty of making a false official statement, impeding an investigation, obtaining under false pretenses prescription pills, distributing ecstasy, using ecstasy, wrongfully possessing Percocet, and using marijuana. Additionally, the records show he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, to avoid a trial by court-martial. 5. 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. 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. It appears the applicant was exposed to traumatic stressors during his deployment to Iraq which caused him to turn to drugs as a way to cope with the situation. He has subsequently been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional and the ARBA psychiatrist concluded that the applicant has a behavioral health condition, PTSD due to combat, which is mitigating for some but not all of the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150010821 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150010821 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2