IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 July 2022 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220000321 APPLICANT’S REQUEST: Reconsideration of his previous request for correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), item 11c (reason and authority) to show he was discharged due to injuries incurred while serving in an active-duty status between 8 June 1955 and 21 March 1957. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Statements * Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings (ROP), dated 6 March 2020 FACTS: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records, which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20180008717 on 6 March 2020. 2. The applicant states when he requested Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits, he sent all the records that he had to the VA. a. He asks what is the process for getting records when the records were allegedly burned or destroyed in a fire that occurred in St. Louis, MO, in 1973? He sent everything that he saved while serving [to the previous Board]. He certainly could not predict he would have heart disease, bladder cancer, hyperthyroid [disease], and or Parkinson’s [disease]. b. He states he was a perfect Soldier; he was never told to keep his own records. He asks where he can search for duplicate records, he needs help? c. He requests to be provided copies of Army Regulation (AR) 635-205 (Personnel Separations) and AR 15-185 (ABCMR). d. He reiterates that an error or injustice occurred in his record, he was injured while covering home plate during a 1956 championship softball game in . He received a cracked pelvic bone, injured his ankles, knees, and ribs when the third base runner, who was a very large man, hit him like they were playing football. He reinjured his ankles and knees aboard a ship on his way home and ended up in the ship’s hospital. He believes these records should still exist, they were Naval medical records and would not have been burned in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Record Center (NPRC). e. The deniers could assist him by getting his medical records from the 19th Ordnance Company and 74th Ordnance Battalion, which were not burned in the 1973, St. Louis Fire. f. He states his DD Form 214 does not show severe frostbite during his visit to the to observe troop movement. g. He asks who is on his Board and what is the guidance when no records are available or are burned? h. He alleges the ABCMR ROP, dated 6 March 2020, that he was provided was missing page 6. i. He believes exposure to the chemicals that he was ordered to spray may have contributed to his medical conditions. j. He asks what is the independent evidence that was referenced in his previous ABCMR ROP. k. He contends he was never reprimanded. l. He asks why his interim Secret clearance is still not shown on his DD Form 214. m. He asks how we know his records are correct when the only records that are available are the ones he provided. n. The prior ROP determination was based on his statements, he included 35mm slide photographs, newspaper pictures and articles, military medical care records, VA and private records, and X-rays. o. He does not believe that a fair attempt was made to assist him as a claimant with research of promised claims and care. p. He states he volunteered and served without an infraction. He was not required to keep his own service record. q. He requests that the Board, please continue to demand his service record and provide him what he needs to get what is necessary. 3. As the applicant was previously advised, his complete service records are not available for the Board to review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members' records at the NPRC in 1973. It is believed the applicant's records were lost or destroyed in that fire. This case is being considered using his DD Form 214 and Special Orders 58, dated 20 March 1957, published by U.S. Army Transfer Station, Fort Sheridan, IL, showing he was released from his assignment at this station and active duty not by reason of physical disability. 4. His DD Form 214 shows he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 8 June 1955, and he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 21 March 1957. He completed 1 year, 9 months, and 14 days of total active service and his award is listed as the Army Good Conduct Medal. His DD Form 214 also shows in: * Reason and Authority, Paragraph 7, AR 635-205 (Personnel Separations- Discharge and Release -Convenience of the Government), [Separation Program Number] “(SPN) 411, Overseas Returnee” * Character of Service, Honorable 5. AR 635-205, provides that commanders are authorized to order separation for the convenience of the government enlisted personnel returned to the continental United States after serving overseas. 6. Currently, AR 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. At the time of the applicant’s separation an SPN was entered on the DD Form 214. AR 635-5 (Personnel Separations Separation Documents) provided the SPN to be entered on the DD Form 214. The applicant’s narrative reason for separation is based on the SPN of “411,” which was appropriate to assign Soldiers separated under the provisions of AR 635-205, paragraph 7, by reason of “Early Separation of Overseas Returnee.” 7. The applicant contends that: a. He suffers from heart disease, bladder cancer, hyperthyroid [disease], and or Parkinson’s [disease] that he believes may have been caused by chemicals that he was ordered to spray on the grass during the time that he served. b. Regarding his request for records that are burned or destroyed in a fire that occurred at the NPRC, St. Louis, MO, in 1973? He should work with the NPRC, who has the ability to reconstruct records when possible. c. Regarding his request for AR 635-205 and AR 15-185, the staff of the Board will provide the applicant copies of these regulations. d. Regarding his request for assistance obtaining medical records from the 19th Ordnance Company, 74th Ordnance Battalion, and his Naval medical records. He also contends that he does not believe that a fair attempt was made to assist him as a claimant with research of promised claims and care. However, the ABCMR is not an investigative body. The ABCMR's mission is to make recommendations based upon the evidence provided by the applicant and the evidence in the available record. The ABCMR may order records to assist in adjudicating an applicant's request, but it is not a records custodian and does not have the ability to determine whether or not specific records are missing. e. Regarding his request for his DD Form 214 to reflect severe frostbite and his interim Secret Clearance. There are no regulations that require the DD Form 214 to list these items. f. Regarding his accusation that the ABCMR ROP, dated 6 March 1920, that he was provided was missing page 6. The staff of the Board will provide him a complete copy of his previous ROP. g. Regarding his request asking what is the independent evidence that was referenced in his previous ROP. The evidence that he previously provided is considered independent evidence. h. Regarding his contention that he was never reprimanded. There is nothing in the previous case to suggest that he was reprimanded or accused of any wrongdoing. i. Regarding his request about how we know his records are correct when the only records that are available are those he provided. The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity, which is that what the Army did was correct. Corrections are made when there is clear evidence that an error exists. j. The applicant contends his previous ROP determination was based on his statement, he included 35mm slide photographs, newspaper pictures and articles, military medical care records, VA and private records, and X-rays. His complete prior ABCMR case is available to the Board for review with his supporting documents. 8. The available evidence shows the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of paragraph 7, AR 635-205, as an overseas returnee. He completed 1 year, 9 months, and 14 days of total active service. 9. Clemency guidance to the Boards for Correction of Military/Navy Records (BCM/NR) does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority to ensure each case will be assessed on its own merits. In determining whether to grant relief BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. This includes consideration of changes in policy, whereby a service member under the same circumstances today would reasonably be expected to receive a more favorable outcome. 10. Published guidance to the BCM/NRs clearly indicates that the guidance is not intended to interfere or impede on the Board's statutory independence. The Board will determine the relative weight of the action that led to the discharge and whether it supports relief or not. In reaching its determination, the Board shall consider the applicant's petition, available evidence and/or submitted documents in support of the petition. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, the military record, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. Based upon a preponderance of the evidence, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to amend the previous Board’s decision. 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20180008717 on 6 March 2020. 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. Title 10, United State Code, section 1556 provides the Secretary of the Army shall ensure that an applicant seeking corrective action by the Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) is provided a copy of all correspondence and communications, including summaries of verbal communications, with any agencies or persons external to agency or board, or a member of the staff of the agency or Board, that directly pertains to or has material effect on the applicant's case, except as authorized by statute. 3. Currently, AR 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. At the time of the applicant’s separation, AR 635-5 provided the SPN to be entered on the DD Form 214. The applicant’s narrative reason for separation is based on the SPN of “411,” which is the appropriate code to assign Soldiers separated under the provisions of AR 635-205, paragraph 7, by reason of “Early Separation of Overseas Returnee.” 4. AR 635-205 (Personnel Separations - Discharge and Release-Convenience of the Government), commanders are authorized to order separation for the convenience of the government enlisted personnel returned to the continental United States after serving overseas. 5. On 3?September 2014, the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) 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. 6. On 25?August 2017, the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued clarifying guidance for the Secretary of Defense Directive to DRBs and BCM/NRs when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharges due in whole or in part to: mental health conditions, including PTSD; Traumatic Brain Injury; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Boards are to give liberal consideration to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part to those conditions or experiences. The guidance further describes evidence sources and criteria and requires Boards to consider the conditions or experiences presented in evidence as potential mitigation for misconduct that led to the discharge. 7. On 25?July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military DRBs and BCM/NRs regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court- martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220000321 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1