PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           12 August 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002077641

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Chairperson	
	Mr. William D. Powers		Member	
	Mr. Frank C. Jones, II		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in an undated letter received on 1 July 2002, that the Board reconsider his previous application wherein he asks that his General Discharge (GD) be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge (HD) by reason of medical disability, and that he be provided back pay and allowances -- ostensibly for a disability retirement -- dating to 9 January 1969.

3.  The applicant states he is a decorated Vietnam veteran suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) dating to his service in the Vietnam War.  In support of his request for reconsideration, he provided the following under separate cover on 13 March 2003:

	a.  A 2 February 2003 letter from his former First Sergeant detailing the applicant's actions on 22 March 1967 when the unit suffered 62 casualties during an engagement with the enemy (for which the First Sergeant was awarded the Medal of Honor);

	b.  Copies of VA (Veterans Administration) medical records from 11 January 1984 and 15 July 1985 showing diagnoses of generalized anxiety disorder, duodenal ulcer, and left wrist fracture and joint replacement, and "seriously impaired psychiatrically and . . . diagnostic impressions of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Chronic, and Major Depression, Recurrent, with Melancholia;"

	c.  A copy of an undated page related to a disability appeal wherein the VA stated, "The veteran filed his initial VA claim for benefits in 1971.  At that time, service connection was established for a duodenal ulcer and the residuals of a shell fragment wound of the right arm, but denied for a nervous condition.  Service connection for PTSD was claimed in May 1985, but denied in October 1985 because the disorder was not found on a psychiatric examination;"

	d.  A copy of a statement, dated 11 December 1968, from his commanding officer at Fort Riley, Kansas, outlining the applicant's adjustment problems; a copy of a 5 August 1968 psychiatric evaluation from the Fort Riley Mental Hygiene Consultation Service showing a diagnosis of "Emotional instability, chronic, moderate, manifested by excitability and ineffectiveness in the fact of minor stress, immaturity, resentment of authority, poor judgment;"

	e.  A copy of an Abstract of Significant Medical History for the period 18 January 1968 to 6 April 1968 and showing a posterior duodenal ulcer crater approximately 4 mm in size, and anxiety reaction, depressive, acute, moderate, manifested by rage, crying and suicidal thoughts; a copy of a 19 October 1967 Clinical Record - Narrative Summary outlining his placement on a strict ulcer program;

	f.  A copy of a 6 April 1968 Clinical Record Cover Sheet showing diagnoses of "Anxiety reaction, chronic, mild, manifested by multiple somatic complaints;"

	g.  A copy of a 24 April 1973 gastro-intestinal examination showing an active ulcer;

	h.  An incomplete, 4-page copy of a 1 July 1999 Compensation and Pension Exam Report for Mental Disorders which suggests that he was diagnosed with PTSD;

	i.  A copy of Department of the Army Lineage and Honors for the 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry;

	j.  A copy of the Medal of Honor Citation for his former First Sergeant;

	k.  A copy of a 2-page document titled "A Co. 1/8 Inf. Division  Vietnam Honor Roll  1966-1967;"

	l.  A copy of 12 pages of "Combat Operations After Action Report[s]" partially listing the applicant's unit's engagements during 1967;

	m.  A copy of a 26 January 2003 letter of support from a former comrade-in-arms;

	n.  A copy of a 4 February 2003 letter of support from a former comrade-in-arms;

	o.  A copy of a 6 February 2003 letter of support from a former comrade-in-arms;

	p.  A copy of a news story about Company A, 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry; and

	q.  A copy of an autographed picture of the applicant's former First Sergeant wearing the Medal of Honor.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was born on 3 December 1947 and, after completing the 9th grade in Peru, Indiana, enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 1 November 1965, at age 18.  He underwent Basic Combat Training (BCT) at Fort Knox, Kentucky, from 10 November 1965 to 5 January 1966 and received excellent conduct and efficiency ratings.  On 14 January 

1966, he began AIT (Advanced Individual Training) in military occupational specialty (MOS) 76D, Ordnance Supply And Parts Specialist, at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland.  Although his conduct was excellent, it appears that he had difficulty with the training and he was transferred to Fort Sam Houston, Texas, where he started AIT for MOS 91B, Medical Aidman, on 11 April 1966.  He successfully completed this AIT program on 18 June 1966, receiving excellent conduct and efficiency ratings.

5.  On 22 June 1966, the applicant was reassigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division, Fort Lewis, Washington.  In September 1966, the applicant's entire unit was transferred to Vietnam where he served as a medic in Company A, 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division.  He was an 18-year old Specialist/E-4.

6.  The applicant served with distinction in Vietnam, earning the admiration and respect of those with whom he served.  Although the applicant's unit participated in numerous engagements with the enemy and the applicant performed his daily duties competently and conscientiously under extremely hazardous circumstances, one incident stands out as indicative of both his unselfish service and the horror he was made to endure.  During Operation Sam Houston in March 1967, a battalion of North Vietnamese Regulars attacked the applicant's company and a sister company of 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry.  In the ensuing battle that lasted for several hours, US losses totaled 27 killed (19 from the applicant's company) and 48 wounded.  The applicant's company commander and forward artillery observer were killed and the company First Sergeant assumed command.  The applicant, exposing himself to enemy fire, heroically tended to the wounded and dying and was, himself, wounded.  For his efforts that day, he was cited with award of the Bronze Star Medal for Valor.

7.  The applicant continued to minister to the physical and emotional needs of his comrades despite the onset of severe abdominal pain that hobbled him and remained with him during the latter half of his tour.  He left Vietnam on 15 August 1967, and his records show he earned the Bronze Star Medal for Valor (V Device), the Purple Heart, the Combat Medical Badge, the Vietnam Service Medal with two Bronze Service Stars (for the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase II and Phase III), and the Vietnam Campaign Medal.  He was a 19-year old Sergeant/E-5.

8.  The applicant returned to the United States and was reassigned to Fort Riley on 10 October 1967.  At Fort Riley, his abdominal pain worsened and he began vomiting during attacks.  Finally, in January 1968, he was diagnosed with a 

posterior duodenal ulcer approximately 4 mm in size.  He was also treated for depression and diagnosed as having anxiety reaction "acute, moderate, manifest by rage, crying and suicidal thoughts."

9.  There is no indication in the applicant's records concerning whether medical personnel considered referring him to a Medical Evaluation Board for possible disability separation.  Unfortunately, contemporaneous with the discovery of his medical problems, he began to absent himself without leave (go AWOL) and received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (for which he was reduced to Specialist/E-4) and a conviction by a special court-martial on 19 August 1968 (for which he was reduced to Private/E-2).

10.  On 5 August 1968, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation for possible elimination for unsuitability.  He was diagnosed with emotional instability of longstanding character, but determined to be mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to have the mental capacity to understand, and participate in, board proceedings.  

11.  In December 1968, the applicant's commander initiated administrative separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-212 for unsuitability.  The action was predicated upon three periods of AWOL totaling 149 days.  The approving authority approved the separation and directed that the applicant receive a GD.  He was separated on 9 January 1969 as a Private/E-2.  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows that he had 2 years, 9 months, and 10 days of creditable active Federal service [with 11 months and 1 day of Vietnam Service] and 149 days of lost time due to AWOL.  He was credited with award of the Bronze Star Medal [the V Device is not noted], the Purple Heart, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal [bronze service stars are not indicated], the Vietnam Campaign Medal (with 1960 Device), the Combat Medical Badge, the Marksmanship Badge (Rifle), and one Overseas Service Bar.

12.  Following his discharge, the applicant has been treated by the Department of Veterans Affairs for generalized anxiety disorder, duodenal ulcer, and left wrist fracture and wrist joint replacement.  In 1985, he was determined to be 30 % disabled.  Data from an interview and psychological testing suggested that he was seriously impaired psychiatrically with diagnostic impressions of PTSD and chronic, major depression.  He was recommended for intensive inpatient treatment.

13.  Army Regulation (AR) 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel who were found to be unfit or unsuitable for military service.  The regulation further provided, in pertinent part, 

that service members discharged for unfitness would be furnished an Undesirable Discharge, unless circumstances warranted a General or Honorable Discharge.  Service members discharged for unsuitability would be furnished an Honorable or General Discharge based upon a review of their complete service record.

14.  AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) sets forth Department of the Army criteria, policy and instructions concerning individual military awards, service medals and service ribbons, combat and special skill badges and tabs, unit decorations, and trophies and similar devices awarded in recognition of accomplishments.  It provides, in pertinent part, that the bronze “V” device indicates acts of heroism involving conflict with an armed enemy and authorizes the bronze “V” device in conjunction with awards of the Army Commendation Medal, the Air Medal and the Bronze Star Medal.

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), in pertinent part, authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.  The applicant participated in two campaigns and is entitled to wear two bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal.

16.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 lists the unit awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  This document shows the unit to which the applicant was assigned was cited for award of the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for the period 1 October 1966 to 28 July 1969 by Department of the Army General Order Number 69, dated 1969.  It also shows that the unit was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation for the period 1 October 1966 to 31 October 1969 by Department of the Army General Order Number 53, dated 1970.  It also provides, in pertinent part, that the Presidential Unit Citation (known as the Distinguished Unit Citation until 3 November 1966) is awarded for extraordinary heroism in action.  A unit must display such gallantry, determination and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission as would warrant award of the Distinguished Service Cross to an individual.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) indicates that the 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry was cited for award of the Presidential Unit Citation for the period 18-26 May 1967.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's record is one of excellent conduct and efficiency through his Vietnam service.  His wartime service is marked by heroism and personal sacrifice.  On the basis of equity considerations alone, it appears that a serious 

injustice has occurred in this case.  The applicant was a young man, 18 years old, with little formal education.  Trained as a medic, he was thrust into the pressure-filled environment of combat in Vietnam.  He performed with distinction and at a great personal cost.  Physically wounded on 22 March 1967, he earned the Purple Heart; psychologically wounded, he was left to fend for himself. 

2.  Upon his return from Vietnam, the applicant was diagnosed with a duodenal ulcer at Fort Riley.  When he could no longer contend with the emotional pain of his Vietnam service and the physical pain caused by his ulcer, he went AWOL.  After his third period of AWOL, his unit commander processed him for an administrative separation under the provisions of AR 635-212, for unsuitability.

3.  AR 635-212 mandated either an Honorable or a General Discharge based upon the particular circumstances and the complete service record of the soldier involved.  Although the applicant’s discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time, the Board finds that the character of the discharge is not commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service and , therefore, inequitable.  This, coupled with the mitigating circumstances surrounding his physical and emotional state at separation, warrants the issuance of an Honorable Discharge.  Additionally, the Board finds it inequitable for the applicant to continue to suffer the stigma of unsuitability as the reason for discharge and recommends that the narrative reason be changed to Secretarial Authority.

4.  The Board also finds that the applicant's DD Form 214 is incorrect as to the awards and decorations authorized in Item 24.  The applicant's Bronze Star Medal should indicate that it was awarded with a "V" Device (for valor); he is entitled to show award of the Presidential Unit Citation; his Vietnam Service Medal should indicate award of two bronze service stars; and he is entitled to award of the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.

5.  The Board finds no justification to award the applicant a physical disability separation with back pay and allowances from 9 January 1969.  The applicant was not diagnosed with a permanent physical disability and numerous psychiatric evaluations done in 1968 and 1969 found him fit for service even though he suffered from anxiety reactions which were determined to have existed prior to his entry on active duty.  Further, the applicant's untimely misconduct pre-empted any form of physical disability processing that may have been contemplated as a result of his physical ailments.

6.  The Board's recommended actions are made as a compassionate expression under the Board's equity powers and in no way condone those actions that led to the applicant's separation.

7.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, and in the interest of justice and equity, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as indicated below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

	a.  Voiding the GD of the individual concerned, dated 9 January 1969; and by

	b.  Issuing to him an HD of the same date by reason of Secretarial Authority; and by

	c.  Annotating in Item 24 on his new DD Form 214 that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device, the Purple Heart, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars, the Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device, the Presidential Unit Citation, the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, the Combat Medical Badge, the Marksmanship Badge (Rifle), and the Overseas Service Bar.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__tsk___  __wdp___  __fcj___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Ted S. Kanamine
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002077641	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030812	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19690109	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-212	
DISCHARGE REASON	A 40.00	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PLUS	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	108.0000	
2.	110.0200	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.