IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 28 April 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150003974 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 IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 28 April 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150003974 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. IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 28 April 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150003974 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: a. an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) to honorable, b. removal of all records of punishment from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), and c. restoration of his rank with all back pay and allowances. 2. The applicant states: a. He was stationed in a combat zone in Nicaragua. He was in fear for his life all the time. They were fired upon every day and he never had a day off while he was there. b. He suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). He was suffering from PTSD when he was absent without leave (AWOL) for 30 days. He had just reenlisted before he was AWOL. c. In 1985, a Soldier could be discharged for misconduct if he suffered from mental illness. He knew he was physically and psychologically ill, but he still performed his duties until he was picked on by his command. He was AWOL In an attempt to relieve the pain. He returned to his unit as soon as he felt better and asked for a discharge. d. The Army issued new guidance from the Secretary of the Defense pertaining to PTSD while serving in a combat zone. He fits the criteria to have his discharge upgraded. 3. The applicant provides: * undated statement * page 4 of his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) * promotion orders * Army Achievement Medal Certificate * training certificate * two letters of appreciation 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 Army on 23 July 1980 for a period of 3 years. He was advanced in rank to specialist four effective 1 January 1982. He was honorably discharged on 14 April 1983 for immediate reenlistment. He reenlisted on 15 April 1983 for a period of 5 years. 3. Item 35 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 2-1 shows, in part: a. he was assigned to Company E, 10th Combat Engineer Battalion, 3d Infantry Division, in Germany from 20 November 1980 through 10 May 1982; and b. he was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 530th Supply and Service Battalion, at Fort Bragg and further attached to the 364th Supply and Service Company at Fort Bragg with duty with U.S. Army Task Force Honduras from 8 February 1984 to 28 February 1985. 4. A DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice), dated 11 January 1985, shows nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (three specifications), larceny (two specifications), and failing to pay a debt. He was reduced in rank to private first class. 5. A DA Form 2627, dated 12 February 1985, shows NJP was imposed against him for being AWOL from 1 February 1985 to 5 February 1985. 6. He was again AWOL from 1 March 1985 to 25 April 1985. 7. On 25 April 1985, he declined a separation medical examination. 8. On 26 April 1985, charges were preferred against him for the AWOL period 1 March 1985 to 25 April 1985. 9. On 26 April 1985, he consulted with counsel and requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. He acknowledged that by submitting his request for discharge he was guilty of a charge against him that authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. He indicated he understood he might be discharged under conditions other than honorable and given a discharge UOTHC, he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, he might be deprived of many or all Army benefits, and he might be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws. He acknowledged he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of a discharge UOTHC. He elected not to make a statement in his own behalf. 10. A Fort Dix Control Facility Form 691A (Personnel Control Facility Interview Sheet), dated 26 April 1985, shows the applicant indicated he was AWOL because: * too many things were happening to him all at once * he was supposed to get promoted to E-5 in February * his first sergeant told him he was not getting promoted because charges were preferred against him for larceny * he did not steal the money * he was having serious marriage and financial problems 11. On 5 June 1985, the separation authority approved his voluntary request for discharge and directed the issuance of a discharge UOTHC and his reduction to the lowest enlisted grade. 12. He was reduced in rank from private first class to private effective 5 June 1985. 13. On 11 July 1985, he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. He completed a total of 4 years, 9 months, and 25 days of creditable active service with 59 days of lost time. His service was characterized as UOTHC. 14. There is no evidence showing he was assigned to Nicaragua. 15. There is no evidence showing he was diagnosed with any mental health condition prior to his discharge. 16. In March 1985, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge. 17. He provided an undated statement from an unidentified source who states: a. The applicant's discharge UOTHC should be upgraded to honorable based on the new PTSD guidance. He also requests removal of all punishment from his records and restoration of his rank with back pay. b. A Soldier should not be punished for being ill. The applicant was AWOL as the result of PTSD. He started drinking heavily in an attempt to manage his PTSD symptoms. Eventually he was AWOL for 30 days. c. The applicant reenlisted in the Army. During his first enlistment, he was stationed in Honduras for a period of 2 years. During this time the Nicaraguans were preparing to attack the Hondurans. He was one of many Soldiers who were stationed there to prevent the attack by the Nicaraguans. He was on duty every day for 2 years without a day off. This, plus the fear for his life, led to a nervous breakdown. d. The applicant completed his first tour of duty and obtained the rank of E-4. When he reenlisted he was sent to a new unit that hadn't seen combat action. He thought he was being singled out by his new first sergeant and company commander who pressured him to be a more squared-away noncommissioned officer. e. The applicant was suffering from PTSD and felt his only option was to go home and rest. He went home for 30 days and returned to his unit to find out he had been discharged without any defense which is a violation of his constitutional rights. f. The applicant accepted his discharge and returned home. Being punished for a mental illness after 4 years of exemplary service was undignified and humiliating. Soldiers with physical combat injuries are not punished based on their inability to do the job because they did not choose to be wounded and a mental disability should be no different. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 provides 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 UOTHC is normally considered appropriate. 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. Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Army Military Human Resource Records Management) prescribes the policies governing the Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), including the OMPF. a. Paragraph 3-6 provides that once a document is properly filed in the AMHRR, the document will not be removed from the record unless directed by the ABCMR or other authorized agency. b. Appendix B (Documents Required for Filing in the AMHRR and/or iPERMS) shows a DA Form 2627 will be filed in the performance or restricted folder of the OMPF as directed by the issuing commander (as indicated in item 5 of the DA Form 2627). DISCUSSION: 1. Although the applicant contends he was stationed in a combat zone in Nicaragua, there is no evidence and he provided no evidence showing he served in Nicaragua. The evidence of record shows he performed duty with U.S. Army Task Force in Honduras from 8 February 1984 to 28 February 1985. 2. Although he now contends he was suffering from PTSD when he was AWOL for 30 days, in 1985 he indicated he was AWOL because: * too many things were happening to him all at once * he was supposed to get promoted to E-5 * his first sergeant told him he was not getting promoted because charges were preferred against him for larceny * he was having serious marriage and financial problems 3. The evidence of record does not support his contention that he was discharged without any defense. The evidence shows he consulted with counsel on 26 April 1985 prior to making his voluntary request for discharge. 4. His voluntary request for separation for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. He had an opportunity to submit a statement wherein he could have voiced his concerns; however, he elected not to do so. 5. His record of service during his last enlistment included two NJP's and 50 days of lost time. As a result, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel. 6. The evidence of record shows he was reduced in rank from private first class to private effective 5 June 1985 in connection with his discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. 7. The DA Forms 2627 for NJP imposed on 11 January 1985 and 12 February 1985 are properly filed in his OMPF. 8. There is no evidence and he provided no evidence showing he was diagnosed with PTSD or any other mental health condition prior to or subsequent to his discharge. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) @#!CASENUMBER 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150003974 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2