BOARD DATE: 31 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006004 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: 31 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006004 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 decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20140014857, dated 14 April 2015. ____________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: 31 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160006004 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 undesirable discharge to a general discharge. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he is providing a new argument that was not previously considered. 3. The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) * AR20140014857 Record of Proceedings * letter dated 16 April 2015 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 AR20140014857 on 14 April 2015. 2. As a new argument, the applicant states: a. He is asking for reconsideration because the reasons concerning his discharge are a direct result of his service in Vietnam. When he returned from Vietnam, he suffered from what he now knows were the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). At the time, there was not much available as far as treatment, and those who sought treatment were often ridiculed. He was doing his best to repress the problems he had but he started to use alcohol and drugs as a means to medicate himself. When that did not work, he could not handle the everyday stress and reminders of his time in combat so he went absent without leave (AWOL). b. He left everything about his service behind him in the hopes of forgetting all the things that still trouble him even after all these years. He has submitted an application for compensation in the hope that he can receive treatment for his current conditions. He is now fully aware and has been for many years that running away from his problems was not the right thing to do. However, as a 20 year old back in that era with all the stigma and lack of compassion toward those suffering from PTSD, it seemed like that was his only way out. If he had a time machine, and knowing what he knows now, he would probably go back and do things differently; however, this was the only recourse he could come up with at the time that he could live with. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 June 1967 and he held military occupational specialty (MOS) 11C (Infantry Indirect Fire Crewmember). He served in the Vietnam from 30 December 1967 to 22 December 1968. On 19 February 1969, he was assigned to the 325th Infantry Regiment, Fort Bragg, NC. 4. He was reported as AWOL from his assigned unit from 4 to 6 March, 7 to 16 March, and 22 March to 8 April 1969. 5. On 9 April 1969, he was returned to military control and was assigned to the U.S. Army Special Processing Detachment, Fort Benning, GA. He was reported as AWOL from his assigned unit from 13 April to 15 May 1969. 6. On 12 June 1969, he was convicted by a special court-martial of four specifications of AWOL from 4 to 6 March, 7 to 16 March, 22 March to 8 April, and 13 April to 15 May 1969 (a total of 64 days or 2 months and 4 days). Part of the sentence imposed was confinement for 6 months. He was confined at the U.S. Army Correctional Training Facility, Fort Riley, KS. 7. On 3 September 1969, he was assigned to the 10th Cavalry Regiment, Fort Knox, KY. On 21 October 1969, he was reported as AWOL and was dropped from the rolls as a deserter. 8. On 16 July 1974, he was apprehended by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and returned to military control; he was assigned to the U.S. Army Personnel Control Facility, Fort Dix, NJ. On 25 July 1974, he underwent a medical examination. The Standard Form (SF) 88 (Report of Medical Examination) shows the examining physician found he was qualified for separation. 9. On 25 July 1974, court-martial charges were preferred against him for one specification of being AWOL from on or about 21 October 1969 to 16 July 1974 (1,730 days or 4 years, 8 months, and 26 days). 10. On 31 July 1974, after consulting with legal counsel, he requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. In his request, he acknowledged that he had not been subjected to coercion with respect to his request for a discharge and had been advised of the implications that were attached to it. 11. He further acknowledged that he understood if his request was accepted, he could be discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He understood that as a result of such a discharge, he might be ineligible for many or all Amy benefits, many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration (VA), and he might be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both State and Federal laws. He also understood that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life by reason of an undesirable discharge. 12. On 10 August 1974, the separation authority approved his request for a discharge and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 21 August 1974, he was discharged accordingly. 13. His DD Form 214 confirms he was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial (separation program designator (SPD) KFS), with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. He completed 1 year, 11 months, and 24 days of net active service and had 1,893 days (or 5 years, 2 months, and 5 days) of lost time due to being AWOL and/or in confinement. 14. On 4 December 1984, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge and determined his discharge was both proper and equitable. 15. On 14 April 2015, the ABCMR denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge and determined his discharge was both proper and equitable. 16. The applicant has not provided any evidence that shows he has ever been treated for or diagnosed with PTSD. 17. In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was received on 5 December 2016 from the Psychiatrist, Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA). The advisory official opined: a. The applicant entered the Army on 19 June 1967 in MOS 11C and served in Vietnam from 30 December 1967 to 22 December 1968. On 21 August 1974, he was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, SPD KFS, with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. His misconduct consisted of being AWOL from 21 October 1969 to 16 July 1974. b. On 4 December 1984, his application for a discharge upgrade was denied by the ADRB. On 16 April 2015, his application for a discharge upgrade was denied by the ABCMR. He is now reapplying to the ABCMR contending that his misconduct was due to the stress and mental health problems he developed as a result of his deployment to Vietnam. On 18 May 2016, the ABCMR requested that the applicant provide the ABCMR with medical documentation supporting his contention that he was suffering from mental health problems at the time of his discharge from the Army. As of 5 December 2016, the applicant had not responded to this request. c. The ARBA Psychiatrist was asked to review this case. Information provided by the applicant and ABCMR was reviewed to include the applicant’s ABCMR application, his past ADRB documentation, and his military personnel and medical records. No civilian or VA medical documentation was provided by the applicant for review. The military electronic medical record (AHLTA) was not reviewed as this system was not in use during the applicant’s time in service. d. A review of the applicant’s military personnel records indicates that he submitted a personal statement to the ADRB when he applied to have his discharge upgraded in 1984. In his personal statement, dated 25 April 1984, the applicant stated he was shot at while in Vietnam. He identified the village where the shot came from to his platoon leader who then ordered the village to be shelled. The applicant stated he heard animals and children screaming in panic. In his statement, he reported he continued to hear these children screaming in his nightmares. He goes on to state he could not adjust to military life stateside after being in Vietnam so he began drinking and went AWOL. e. In a memorandum written by his commanding officer, Captain (CPT) WB, dated 31 July 1974, he stated that the applicant "had been medically examined and is qualified for separation. There does not appear to be any reasonable grounds to believe that the individual is or was at the time of his misconduct mentally defective, deranged, or abnormal." In an SF 93 (Report of Medical History), dated 25 July 1974, the applicant wrote, "I am in good health." In the SF 93, he denied having frequent trouble sleeping, depression, excessive worry, problems with memory or amnesia, or nervous trouble of any sort. There is no documentation his military personnel records of any symptoms or behaviors typical of PTSD or any other behavioral health (BH) disorder. There is no indication the applicant failed to meet military retention standards under the provisions of AR 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness). f. In conclusion, based on the available documentation, it is the medical opinion of the ARBA's psychiatrist that there is insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s contention that the misconduct which led to his undesirable discharge was due to stress or mental health problems developed while he was on active duty. While the applicant’s personal statement is compelling, it is, by itself, insufficient to establish the presence of a mitigating BH condition. 18. On 7 December 2016, the applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion for information and to allow him the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal. He did not respond. REFERENCE: AR 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 10 of the version in effect at the time provided that a member who committed an offense or offenses 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. The member would be advised of the procedures and rights available to him, the elements of the offense or offenses charged, 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 - in lieu of trial by court-martial. 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. DISCUSSION: 1. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge. Discharges under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10, are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. 2. He voluntarily requested a discharge to avoid trial by a court-martial. His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. The characterization of his service was commensurate with the reason for his discharge. 3. The applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because at the time of his misconduct he was suffering from what is now known as PTSD; however, as confirmed by the advisory official, his available record does not support this contention and he has not provided any evidence that shows he has ever been diagnosed with or treated for PTSD or any other BH condition. 4. The evidence of record shows the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being AWOL for over 2 months. He subsequently went AWOL again and was AWOL for almost 5 years prior to being apprehended and returned to military control. At the time of his discharge on 21 August 1974, he had over 5 years of lost time due to being AWOL and/or in confinement. 5. 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. 6. 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160006004 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160006004 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2