ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 August 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180016357 APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of his records to show he was separated based on physical disability and medically retired with a 100% disability rating. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * 10-page self-authored statement * AJJAG-A Form 480-R (Mental Hygiene Consultation Service Certificate/Statement), dated 24 September 1969 * Addendum to Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), dated 3 December 1969 * DA Form 8-275-2 (Clinical Record Cover Sheet) * Standard Form 505 (Clinical Record) * DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) * DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract) (back page) * Headquarters Special Troops, Fort Jackson, SC, Special Court-Martial Order Number 473, dated 17 June 1969 * DA Form 2627 (Summarized Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) * DA Form 20B (Insert Sheet to DA Form 20 – Record of Court-Martial Conviction) * Affidavit FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. In a 10-page self-authored statement/affidavit, the applicant narrates his experiences prior, during, and after his military service and disputes the accuracy of his records, contending that the records have been doctored. The applicant’s entire statement and affidavits were provided to the Board for review. The applicant states, in part: a. He entered the service as a healthy (mentally and physically) moral average 18 year old kid and he was discharged a physical and mental wreck. His affidavits and records show much – some is conjecture, most not. He was released in the condition described and recorded. He’s been sick and unable to hold a job for 50 years. He has been unable to get his job history from the Social Security Agency. Hopefully the Board can. That will support his claim. b. He has done all the work on this himself. It shows a fairly literate capable person. Do not be fooled, this is done piecemeal. There are days where he can’t function due to this headache he’s had for 50 years or because he goes into a state of paranoia, intense fear, or when he loses touch with reality. Other than the headache, the paranoia states have lessened significantly over the years. c. He was heavily recruited to go to officer candidate school at Fort Belvoir, and he was leaning that way until the warehouse fiasco. Look at all of his mental scores, physicals, psych evals etc. Look at his overseas assignment preference: Vietnam. That is not the person he was made out to be. d. He was raised by his grandmother and a large extended family. He was taught right from wrong and learned to respect the rights of others and to love God, family, and country. He graduated from high school and went to California to join the Army with his cousin. In July 1968 he went to basic training at Ft Lewis, WA and his conduct and efficiency ratings were “excellent”. From there he was sent to Ft Belvoir, VA for advanced individual training (AIT) to become a turbine diesel generator engineer/operator. During this time his conduct and efficiency ratings were deemed “excellent”. e. In November 1968 the he was placed on extra duty. He and a group of other Soldiers were taken to a fenced in group of warehouses. They were told to clean up a damaged warehouse that contained 55 gallon drums. Most of the drums were gray, but one area had a bunch of olive drab colored drums with yellow markings. These drums were surrounded by chain link fencing. He was told that these drums were to be dumped somewhere out at sea. As they were cleaning up the warehouse, the applicant accidentally snagged the chain link fence surrounding the green drums with a forklift. His last coherent thought was of drums falling everywhere and soon an alarm going off. After that everything is hazy, including his subsequent hospitalization for “pneumonia”. He was given a private room and seen by a lot of different people and asked a bunch of strange questions. He was discharged and given holiday leave and a reassignment. He never saw any of his classmates again. f. His family became concerned because he never called them before his leave. He had called family and friends weekly during his enlistment but just sort of neglected to do so after the “accident”. That night seemed strange, but his family and lifelong friends were shocked at his attitude and demeanor while on leave. At that time he was still mentally “fuzzy”; he even slept through Christmas day. g. After reporting to Ft Jackson, SC he went through a nightmare of surreal events. He would experience terrible dreams nightly. He would wake up terrified, full of adrenaline and sweating so much his bed would be soaked. Many times he was paralyzed with his eyes open and super paranoid. In his mind he would scream to get up but he couldn’t. Subsequently it became hard to go to sleep because he was afraid of what was to come. This condition lasts to this day. He also has a headache and dizzy spells that he has had for the last 50 years. He goes through periods of withdrawal from all around him. Then there are periods of startling clarity and elation. Since the “pneumonia” incident his breathing has gotten progressively worse and he has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. h. He was sent to the stockade in Ft Jackson and put in a metal box that sat on a concrete pad with no shade. It was summertime in South Carolina, of course he had hallucinations, who wouldn’t. He was beaten regularly and was fed a bowl of cereal in the morning and a bowl of beans at night. Every third day he would get two regular meals. He was interviewed by different officers from majors to full bird colonels, and civilians. Eventually he passed out and came to in a hospital. i. From the time he entered the hospital until the day he was escorted to the plane by two MPs on his discharge day (July 4, 1969 until November 14, 1969) he was given daily (strong) injections of thorazine. At bedtime he would be given two pills, either red ones (seconal) or yellow ones (nembutal). He was given a host of other pills, but theses have stuck in his mind because the thorazine brought on the paralytic fear in seconds, while the yellow or red pills freed him from that state into dreamless sleep. j. Since his discharge he has never held a job for any significant amount of time. He lost all contact with his family and friends and he does not care. He has essentially spent most of his life in jail through inept and petty crimes and he does not care. He has not had any type of life and once again he does not care. He understands it is against the law to release a Soldier in the condition he was in - that he cares about. After four straight months of being heavily drugged, he was put on a plane to San Francisco, CA from Columbia, SC. By the time he landed, the withdrawal began. He still thinks about all he went through, no matter how hard he tries not to. To this day he has a morbid fear of any sort of mental health treatment so he knows how to avoid it. k. To summarize: he went into the U.S. Army June 25, 1968; he completed basic training at Ft Lewis, WA and then went to Ft Belvoir, VA for AIT on September 29, 1968. The incident with the 55 gallon drums hospitalized him. He was put on hold over status on November 20, 1968. He was subsequently reassigned to Ft. Jackson, SC on June 17, 1969. He was put in the stockade. He was taken from the stockade and put in a mental ward on July 4, 1969. He was kept there until his discharge on November 14, 1969. He went into the Army and all American mentally and physically fit kid. He came out a moral and physical cripple. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 July 1968. 4. On 14 March 1969, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for disobeying a lawful order issued by his superior noncommissioned officer. 5. The applicant DA Form 20 shows he was absent without leave (AWOL) during the following periods: * 17-24 March 1969 * 4 April-5 May 1969 * 23 May-8 June 1969 6. On 9 June 1969, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 17 to 25 March 1969 and from 4 April to 6 May 1969. The sentence consisted of confinement at hard labor for five months and forfeiture. 7. On 30 July 1969, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) found the applicant medically unfit for further military service based on a diagnosis of brain syndrome manifested by psychosis associated with intoxication with various hallucinogenic drugs, chronic, recurrent, moderate, manifested by visual hallucinations, stuporous states, marked withdrawal and lack of judgment. Stress: minimal, routine military service. Impairment: severe, at present, for continued military service, not in line of duty, existed prior to service (EPTS). The MEB recommended referral of the applicant's case to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for consideration of separation under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), chapter 9 (Expeditious Discharge for Disabilities Existing Prior to Service). 8. A DA Form 1049, dated 30 July 2019, subject: Request Expeditious Discharge under the Provisions of AR 635-40, shows the applicant requested discharge for physical disability. He acknowledged he had been informed that, based upon the findings and recommendations of an MEB, he was considered to be unfit for retention in the military service by reason of physical disability, which was found to have existed prior to his enlistment and which was neither incident to nor aggravated by military service. He also acknowledged that if his application was approved, he understood he would be separated by reason of physical disability-EPTS, and would receive a discharge of the type commensurate with the character of his service, as determined by the officer designated to effect his separation. 9. A Mental Hygiene Consultation Service Certificate/Statement, dated 24 September 1969, shows the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation. He was diagnosed with the same condition(s) identified by the MEB. The evaluating psychiatrist also indicated the applicant had no mental defects sufficient to warrant separation from the service under the provisions of AR 635-40. His condition represented a long-standing, refractory personality disorder which was not amenable to disciplinary action, psycho•therapy, reclassification or reassignment. He was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative or judicial action deemed appropriate by command. The psychiatrist strongly recommended the applicant's separation from the service under the provisions of AR 635-212 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Unfitness and Unsuitability). 10. On 26 September 1969, the applicant's commander recommended his separation from the Army under the provisions of AR 635-212 for unsuitability. The commander stated the applicant was mentally unstable according to mental hygiene reports. He had to be physically restrained on at least one occasion for no apparent reason. The commander also stated he assumed command of the applicant's unit and was made aware of the fact that the applicant was serving confinement for AWOL but had been sent from the Post Stockade to ward 38 of the hospital on post. He contacted the applicant's doctor who explained that he was mentally unstable and emotionally disturbed even if his recommendation for a medical discharge had been disapproved. On one occasion, the applicant had to be physically restrained by the stockade commanding officer because he had to receive a haircut. 11. The applicant consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, his right to present his case before a board of officers, to submit a statement in his own behalf, and to be represented by counsel. He elected to waive his rights. 12. On 7 November 1969, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of AR 635-212, paragraph 6b, and directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. On 14 November 1969, he was discharged accordingly. 13. An addendum, dated 3 December 1969, in reference to the applicant's MEB, U.S. Army Hospital, Fort Jackson, SC, dated 30 July 1969, contain the following statements: a. This patient was presented to the U.S. Army PEB, Fort Gordon, GA, on 5 September 1969. It was their recommendation that he be separated from the military service under the provisions of AR 635-212. b. His unit was contacted and separation under the provisions of AR 635-212 was initiated. He was retained in the hospital by verbal agreement because it was felt that he was a behavior problem. His separation was effected on 14 November 1969 and he was discharged from the hospital. 14. On 19 June 2019, the Army Review Boards Agency medical advisor provided a medical advisory opinion. The opinion found the applicant failed medical retention requirements due to voluntary drug intoxication and misconduct. Therefore, administrative separation was the correct course of action in this case. A copy of the complete medical advisory was provided to the Board for their review and consideration. 15. The applicant was provided a copy of the advisory opinion on 20 June 2019 and given an opportunity to submit comments. He did not respond. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found the relief was not warranted. Based upon the applicant's service record, the evidence stating that his condition was EPTS/not in line of duty, the medical advisory conclusion that there were no medical conditions present that would mitigate the misconduct of the applicant and the applicant failing to provided any form of rebuttal to those findings, the Board concluded there was insufficient evidence of an error or injustice which would warrant making a change to the applicant’s record. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. AR 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness) provides that for an individual to be found unfit by reason of physical disability, the individual must be unable to perform the duties of his or her office, grade, rank, or rating. 3. AR 40-501, then in effect, states in chapter 3 (Retention Medical Fitness Standards), paragraph 3-31a (Character and Behavior Disorders) that character and behavior disorders are considered to render an individual administratively unfit rather than unfit because of physical disability. Interference with performance of effective duty will be dealt with through appropriate administrative channels. 4. AR 635-212, then in effect, set forth the policy and procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness and unsuitability. Paragraph 6b states an individual was subject to separation for unsuitability when one or more of the following conditions existed: (1) inaptitude; (2) character and behavior disorders; (3) apathy (lack of appropriate interest, defective attitudes, and inability to expend effort constructively); (4) alcoholism; (5) enuresis; and (6) homosexuality (Class III - evidenced homosexual tendencies, desires, or interest, but was without overt homosexual acts). When separation for unsuitability was warranted, an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual's entire record. 5. AR 15-185 (ABCMR) states in: a. Paragraph 2-2, the ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record. It is not an investigative body. b. Paragraph 2-19, the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence.