BOARD DATE: 20 July 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150018690 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ ____x____ ____x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 20 July 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150018690 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decisions of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20060006932, dated 5 December 2006. ______________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. BOARD DATE: 20 July 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150018690 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 discharge under other than honorable conditions to honorable. 2. The applicant states: a.  He knows what he did was wrong and he is sorry for his actions. b.  He was going through changes at the time and his military occupational specialty (MOS) was being changed. c.  He is sure there were others who were doing worse things than he did. He wishes he could take it all back, but he knows he cannot. He desires a second chance. 3. The applicant provides: * four Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Forms 21-41388 (Statement in Support of Claim) * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) 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 AR20060006932 on 5 December 2006. 2. The applicant provided four character-reference statements and new arguments not previously considered by the Board that warrant consideration at this time. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 February 1977. 4. On 7 July 1977, he completed training and he was awarded primary MOS 16B (Hercules Missile Crewman). 5. Headquarters, 172nd Infantry Brigade, Orders 205-12, dated 24 July 1978, awarded him primary MOS 63B (Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic) effective 12 July 1978 by Department of the Army reclassification. 6. On 31 August 1978, his check cashing privileges were suspended for 6 months. Additionally, records show his command received letters of indebtedness from creditors claiming the applicant was not paying his debts. 7. On 16 February 1979, a criminal complaint was filed against the applicant for willfully and unlawfully taking a camera and flash attachment. 8. On 20 February 1979, the applicant was arrested by civil authorities at Fort Wainwright for larceny of property over $50.00. Bail was set at $250.00 and he posted bail on 28 February 1979. 9. On 16 April 1979, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being drunk on duty. His punishment consisted of reduction to pay grade E-2 and forfeiture of pay (suspended for 1 month). 10. On 20 April 1979, he was tried by civil authorities and convicted of petty larceny pursuant to his plea of guilty. He was sentenced to 30 days of imprisonment with suspension of 21 days for 6 months on the condition of good behavior. 11. On 1 May 1979, his commander vacated the suspended portion of his punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ. 12. On 3 May 1979, he was notified of his commander's recommendation for separation due to his civil conviction under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-12(a). His commander also provided a statement in which he indicated the applicant had failed to respond to counseling or take any positive steps to alter his substandard performance since his rehabilitative transfer to the unit on 28 May 1978. Further, the applicant required constant supervision to ensure the minimum standards of conduct, job performance, and military bearing. He displayed apathy toward the Army, his job, and life in the military. He expressed an adamant desire to be discharged during each counseling session and he made no effort to rehabilitate himself. 13. On 4 May 1979, he underwent a mental status evaluation and he was psychiatrically cleared for administrative separation. 14. On 23 May 1979 after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived all of his rights and he declined to submit a statement in his own behalf. 15. On 22 June 1979, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation and directed his reduction to the grade of E-1 and his receipt of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. 16. On 2 July 1979, he was discharged accordingly. He completed 2 years, 4 months, and 2 days of creditable active military service and he had 8 days of lost time for the period 20 February 1979 to 28 February 1979 due to his confinement by civil authorities. 17. On 14 July 1982, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 18. He provided a copy of his independent psychiatric evaluation for the Bureau of Workers Compensation, dated 25 April 2006, from Dr. A____ B. L____ which was previously submitted and shows, in part: a.  The applicant indicated he had been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). He witnessed his father shooting his mother then killing himself when he was 8 years old. He struggled with depression and he had other medical conditions, including seizure disorder. b.  The applicant indicated he was jailed in 1992 after being charged by his sister of raping and kidnapping the sister's 8-year old daughter. He denied the allegation, but he entered a plea agreement for a shorter jail sentence. c.  The applicant reported had nightly difficulty falling asleep and staying asleep and problems with energy, motivation, and concentration. d.  The applicant indicated he was placed in an orphanage where he was treated badly. He and his brother were adopted by a man who sexually abused him until he left home at age 15. e.  The applicant indicated was denied an inheritance of land by his four sisters and he has had multiple situational crises and disappointments which contributed to his depression. f.  His evaluation revealed that if his PTSD was present, it was related to his parent's death. He was diagnosed with major depression. 19. He also provided four VA Forms 21-4138 from individuals who state he paid his debt on time, he was a hard worker whenever he had the chance, he took great care of his aunt, and he was always fair to everyone he met. 20. On 13 April 2017, the Army Review Boards Agency Clinical Psychiatrist provided an advisory opinion in which she stated: a.  The combination of his arrested emotional development, lack of proper parental guidance and teaching, and his chronic depression undoubtedly led to poor impulse control and an inability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his actions leading to his theft of the camera and flash attachment. She opined that in light of these factors, the discharge under other than honorable conditions that he received for impulsively stealing $300.00 worth of property seemed unduly harsh. b.  While Dr. A____ B. L____ was not able to make an official diagnosis of PTSD during his 2006 evaluation, given the applicant's history of severe trauma (witnessing his parent's death at age 8, being taken from his home and placed in an orphanage soon thereafter, and then being adopted by a man who sexually abused him until age 15), it is almost certain that his complex trauma negatively affected his psychological development. 21. On 14 April 2017, a copy of the advisory opinion was provided to the applicant for review and comment. He did not respond. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a.  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.  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. c. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is an administrative separation from the service under conditions other than honorable. It may be issued when the reason for separation is based upon a pattern of behavior that constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of Soldiers of the Army. d.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to fully honorable. 2. The applicant's records contain evidence of extensive negative counseling, nonjudicial punishment, suspension of check cashing privileges, indebtedness, and a civil conviction and confinement for theft. 3. There is no evidence of record and he provided no evidence showing he was not properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the regulation in effect at the time. 4. The Army Review Boards Agency Clinical Psychiatrist opined that the combination of his arrested emotional development, lack of proper parental guidance and teaching, and his chronic depression undoubtedly led to poor impulse control and an inability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his actions. 5. Nevertheless, an 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150018690 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150018690 6 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2