ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:    24 April 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170014315


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Reconsideration of his previous requests for an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

* DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
* Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Initial Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)-Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM V) Disability Benefits Questionnaire, dated 10 May 2017.

FACTS:

1.  The applicant states he is submitting evidence of his PTSD diagnosis, dated 10 May 2017, which took him two years to obtain.  He requested this information several time and finally had to drive to the VA to pick it up.  The VA put him off on diagnosing him with PTSD for two years after he was trying to see a doctor for four years.  He did not have the PTSD evidence when he previously filed for a review of his discharge.  

2.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's cases by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in Docket Number AR20060003083 on 19 September 2006 and Docket Number AR20150010884 on 8 November 2016.

3.  The applicant provides his VA Initial PTSD-DSM V Disability Benefits Questionnaire, dated 10 May 2017, which was not previously considered by the Board.  

4.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 December 1969.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he arrived in Vietnam on 10 July 1970.

5.  His DA Form 20 also shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) during the following periods:

* 17 January-18 April 1971
* 21-27 June 1971
* 19 July-7 September 1971

6.  On 23 September 1971, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant for his AWOL offenses.  

7.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

8.  In doing so, he acknowledged the charges preferred against him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He further acknowledged:

* he had not been subjected to coercion with respect to his request for discharge
* he had been advised of the implications that were attached to it
* he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and he could be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the VA
* he could be deprived of many or all Army benefits and he could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws
* he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life by reason of an undesirable discharge

9.  On 15 October 1971, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed his reduction to private/E-1 and the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  On 20 October 1971, he was discharged accordingly.  His DD Form 214 shows he accrued 150 days of lost time and that his service was characterized as under conditions other than honorable.

10.  On 26 October 2017, the Army Review Boards Agency psychiatrist/medical advisor provided an advisory opinion.  The advisory found the available documentation showed that PTSD existed at the time of the applicant's discharge and that the diagnosis of PTSD is a mitigating factor in the misconduct that resulted in his discharge.  A copy of the complete medical advisory was provided to the Board for their review and consideration.
11.  The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion on 27 October 2017 and given an opportunity to submit comments.  He responded and expressed his agreement with the findings and conclusions of the medical advisory opinion.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, to include the DoD guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the Board determined that relief was warranted.  Based upon the type of misconduct, and the medical advisory finding a nexus between that misconduct and a medical condition of the applicant, the Board concluded that upgrading the characterization of service to Under Honorable Conditions (General) was warranted.

BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

X	X	X	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by reissuing the applicant a DD Form 214 showing his characterization of service as Under Honorable Conditions (General).

	 
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.


REFERENCES:
1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 10, in effect at the time, provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses under the UCMJ, 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, the type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of VA 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 to an individual who was discharged for the good of the service.

	b.  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.

	c.  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.  On 3 September 2014, the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged under other than honorable conditions 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.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20170014315


2


1