IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 July 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120022004 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 upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. 2. The applicant states: a. he was under terrible stress from his tour in Vietnam. He knows he has Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). b. he was an armor reconnaissance specialist assigned to light operation helicopters with the 101st Airborne Division. He was involved in combat almost on a daily basis. They did observation for combat operations and reconnaissance to find the North Vietnamese with Viet Cong. His job on the helicopter was to throw smoke when they started drawing fire and then he fired on enemy soldiers with his M-16 as they charted and/or radioed in their positions. c. he does not have a body count of the enemy soldiers he killed because he constantly fired his M-16 from the helicopter, but to this day he can see the bodies lying on the ground below that he shot. d. when he returned to Fort Ord, CA he just could not function. He went on sick call, went to his company commander, and went to the Judge Advocate General for help. At the time, the only thing he knew was that he could not stand it anymore and he wanted out. He even went absent without leave (AWOL), but he turned himself in. e. he did not know or understand the impact that combat had placed on him or what it did to his health. He was evaluated by medical and psychological personnel, but at the time PTSD was not something that was diagnosed or explained to him. He was offered the opportunity to receive an undesirable discharge and he accepted it because he wanted to get everything over with and put his military experience and Vietnam behind him. f. he was young and did not understand that he had something that needed psychological treatment and that would affect him the remainder of his life. Because of his service in Vietnam, his life has not been as it could have been. He constantly suffers from the stress of daily living and his combat memories; it seems as if they happened yesterday. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge). 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 was born on 12 June 1950. At the age of 20 years, 10 months, and 5 days of age, on 16 April 1971, he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) April 1971 for a period of 3 years. He completed his training and he was awarded military occupational specialty 11D (armor reconnaissance specialist). He served in Vietnam from 3 September 1971 to 18 April 1972. 3. He went AWOL from 21 September 1972 to 18 December 1972. On 22 December 1972, charges were preferred against the applicant for the AWOL offense. Trial by special court-martial was recommended. 4. On 5 January 1973, he underwent a separation physical examination and he was found qualified for separation. On his Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination) he indicated "I am in good health." 5. On 8 January 1973, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 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 indicated he understood he could be discharged under conditions other than honorable and be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate, he might be deprived of many or all Army benefits, he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, and he might be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws. He also acknowledged he understood he might encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an undesirable discharge. He elected to submit a statement in his own behalf. In summary, he stated: * he feels the Army is just one big hassle * he hates it and simply does not feel he should be forced to continue serving in an organization such as this * there is no way of rehabilitating him because he has decided not to perform any further military duties whatsoever * he thinks he deserves a general discharge, but would accept any discharge as long as he is discharged soon 6. On 29 January 1973, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. 7. On 21 February 1973 he was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service – in lieu of trial by court-martial with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. He completed 1 year, 7 months, and 9 days of total active service with 87 days of time lost. 8. There is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any evidence that shows he was diagnosed with PTSD or any other mental condition prior to his discharge. 9. There is no evidence that shows the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. 10. Army Regulation 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. Consulting counsel would advise the member concerning the elements of the offense or offenses charged, the type of discharge normally given under the provisions of this chapter, the loss of Veterans Administration 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. 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 AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends he was under terrible stress from his tour in Vietnam and he knows he has PTSD. He also states he was evaluated by medical and psychological personnel, but at the time PTSD wasn't something that was diagnosed or explained to him. However, there is no evidence which shows he was diagnosed with any mental condition prior to his discharge. 2. He contends he did not know or understand the impact that combat had placed on him or what it did to his health. However, on 5 January 1973, medical evidence shows he was found qualified for separation and he indicated he was in good health. 3. He also contends he was young; however, age is not a sufficiently mitigating factor. He was almost 21 years old when he enlisted in the RA and he successfully completed training. There is no evidence that indicates he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed their military terms of service. 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. The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were therefore appropriate considering all the facts of the case. 5. His record of service included 87 days of time lost. 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. In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting the applicant an honorable or a general discharge. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ 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 that 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120022004 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120022004 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1