RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         7 DECEMBER 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004103833


      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             |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Mark D. Manning               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John E. Denning               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. James B. Gunlicks             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that the undesirable discharge of her deceased
husband, a former service member (FSM) be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states the FSM was furnished an undesirable discharge as
a result of behavior that is now known to be Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD).  She states that her husband was sent into combat during the Korean
War when he was 17 years old and that he was wounded on two separate
occasions, which led to his being awarded two Purple Hearts.  She states
that the fact that PTSD was not recognized during the Korean War is enough
reason to upgrade his discharge and she asks that this Board consider her
request positively.

3.  The applicant provides in support of her application, Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) rating decision dated 28 July 2003; a letter from a
VA social worker dated 20 November 2002; a letter from a VA social worker
dated 19 September 2002; a VA request for Army information dated 24 June
1954; a copy of the FSM’s enlistment medical examination; a copy of the
FSM’s separation medical examination; a copy his Record of Previous
Convictions; a copy of his Mental Status Evaluation dated 17 August 1953; a
copy of a psychiatric evaluation conducted on the FSM dated 5 June 1953; a
copy of a psychiatric evaluation conducted on the FSM dated 22 May 1953; a
copy of the FSM’s physical profile dated 17 August 1953; a copy of the
request for a board of officers dated 31 August 1953; a copy of the
findings and recommendation of a board of officers; a memorandum from the
First Cavalry Division to the FSM dated 27 October 1953, directing him to
appear in court; affidavits of witnesses regarding the FSM’s conduct while
in the Army; a copy of the FSM’s Report of Separation (DD Form 214); a copy
of an office memorandum dated 21 June 1954; a declaration of marital
status; a copy of her marriage license; a copy of a letter requesting that
the FSM’s discharge be upgraded dated 14 November 2002, an undated letter
from the FSM’s children requesting that his discharge be upgraded; a
Statement in Support of Claims from a Veterans Services Officer dated 20
January 2002, supporting the applicant’s request; a copy of an application
to this Board dated 19 September 2002, signed by the FSM requesting that
his discharge be upgraded; and a copy of the FSM’s Certificate of Death.





CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Prior to his entry on active duty, the FSM underwent a medical
examination for the purpose of enlistment in the Army and was found to be
qualified for enlistment.  On 25 November 1949, he enlisted in the Army in
Portland, Oregon, for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1.  He successfully
completed his training as a light weapons infantry leader.

2.  On 12 May 1950, the FSM was convicted by a summary court-martial of
being drunk in a public place.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture of pay in
the amount of $15.00.

3.  The FSM was convicted by a special court-martial on 7 September 1950,
of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 5 July 1950 until 25 August 1950.
 He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 5 months, a reduction to
the lowest enlisted pay grade and a forfeiture of pay in the amount of
$50.00 per month for 5 months.

4.  The available records show that the FSM was awarded the Purple Heart on
5 December 1950, for shell fragment wounds that he received to his left leg
and right arm on 25 November 1950, while in Korea.

5.  On 12 March 1952, the FSM was convicted by a special court-martial of
being AWOL from 4 December 1951 until 16 January 1952.  He was sentenced to
confinement at hard labor for 4 months and a forfeiture of pay in the
amount of $60.00 per month for 4 months.

6.  On 26 February 1953, the FSM was convicted by a summary court-martial
of being AWOL from 7 February 1953 until 21 February 1953.  He was
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 30 days and a forfeiture of pay
in the amount of $60.00.

7.  The FSM was convicted by a special court-martial on 1 May 1953, of
being AWOL for 1 day and of entering an off limits area.  He was sentenced
to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay in the
amount of $30.00 per month for 6 months.

8.  On 22 May 1953, the FSM was referred for a psychiatric evaluation for
possible separation.  The attending psychiatrist opined that the FSM was
showing a chronic form of psychosis and as such he was not responsible for
his conduct.  The psychiatrist further opined that although delusions and
hallucinations were not present, he nevertheless showed the cardinal signs
of schizophrenia, namely dissociation in thought processes, a disturbance
of affect, and a gradual shutting off of reality.  The psychiatrist
determined the FSM’s condition was chronic in nature; however, may show
remissions during its course.

9.  The FSM underwent a second psychiatric evaluation on 5 June 1953, and
the same attending psychiatrist referenced the determination made in the
initial evaluation in that the FSM was not responsible for his conduct due
to a chronic form of psychosis.  The psychiatrist opined that the FSM was
psychotic at that time and was not eligible for separation under the
provisions of Army Regulation 615-368. The psychiatrist further opined that
the FSM should be evacuated to the 8167th Army Unit in Tokyo for further
psychiatric observation and evaluation regarding his final disposition.

10.  The FSM was placed in observation at the 8167th Army Unit Hospital
from 2 August 1953 until 17 August 1953.  While in observation, the FSM
underwent a neuropsychiatric examination and the division psychiatrist
reported that the FSM lacked initiative in his work and had been repeatedly
late for formation.  During the examination, the FSM stated that he could
not tolerate any form of direction, even when he was being told to go to
chow.  The FSM also stated that he had been miserable in the Army and that
out of his 3 years and 10 months in the Army, he had over 21 months of lost
time.  The neuropsychiatric report shows that the FSM had always been self-
centered and meticulous in the care of his hair and dress and that his
service in the Army had been unsatisfactory to both the Army and himself.
The commanding officer was informed that the FSM suffered from a passive-
aggressive reaction, chronic, moderately severe, manifested by
eccentricity, unsociability, repeated AWOL’s, procrastination, stubbornness
and obstructionism.

11.  During the neuropsychiatric examination the psychiatrist opined that
the FSM was not insane, possessed sufficient mental capacity to know the
difference between right and wrong and to be able to adhere to the right
and refrain from the wrong; and that he was considered to be mentally
responsible for his acts.  The psychiatrist indicated that the FSM was not
amenable to hospitalization, treatment, disciplinary action, training,
transfer to another station or organization, or reclassification to another
type of duty and that there were no disqualifying mental or physical
diseases or defects sufficient to warrant a discharge through medical
channels.  The psychiatrist opined that the FSM would never be able to
adjust to the service and would be a constant source of trouble and a
liability to his organization.  The psychiatrist recommended that the FSM
be separated from the service as expeditiously as possible under the
provisions of Army Regulation 615-368.
12.  A Board of Officers convened on 3 November 1953, to determine the
FSM’s fitness for retention in the Army.  During the proceedings, the board
noted that the FSM had every chance to make good in his assigned
organization and that he could have transferred to any other platoon or
squad in the company; however he refused to do so.  The board further noted
that the FSM had every chance to serve under different officers or
noncommissioned officers; however he wanted to stay where he was in the
first platoon.  It was also noted by the board that he had every
opportunity to make a satisfactory soldier of himself; however, he did not
seem to care if he did his job or not.  The board found the FSM to be unfit
for continued military service and recommended that he be discharged from
the service due to unfitness.

13.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on
9 November 1953.  Accordingly, on 11 December 1953, the FSM was discharged
under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-368, due to unfitness.  He had
completed 2 years 10 months and 8 days of total active service and he had
approximately 434 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  He was
furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

14.  The available records fail to show that this Board ever received or
considered the FSM’s application for correction of military records dated
19 September 2002.

15.  The FSM died on 24 September 2002.

16.  In October 2002, the applicant petitioned the VA for veterans’
benefits on behalf of her late husband.  On 28 July 2003, the VA notified
the applicant that while the negative evidence of record was considerable,
it was outweighed by the evidence in favor of the FSM.  The VA stated, in
effect, that consideration was given to the fact that the FSM was wounded
in action while serving his country, incurred mental suffering as a result
of combat, and in the opinion of a medical professional, the bulk of his
misconduct was directly related to his combat experience.  The VA
determined that FSM’s Army service was honorable for VA purposes.

17.  Further review of the available records fail to show that the FSM ever
applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge
within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.



18.  Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic
authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness.
That regulation provided for the discharge of individuals who had
demonstrated their unfitness by giving evidence of undesirable habits and
traits of character manifested by misconduct.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The FSM's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with
applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would
tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were
appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  The Board has noted the contentions made by the applicant regarding the
FSM and his alleged PTSD.  The Board has also noted that two psychiatric
evaluations that were conducted on him on 22 May 1953 and on 5 June 1953.
However, after he had a thorough neuropsychiatric examination conducted on
him on 17 August 1953, a psychiatrist determined that he was not insane,
possessed sufficient mental capacity to know the difference between right
and wrong and to be able to adhere to the right and refrain from the wrong;
and that he was considered to be mentally responsible for his acts.

4.  The psychiatrist that conducted the neuropsychiatric examination on
17 August 1953, determined that the FSM had no disqualifying mental or
physical diseases or defects sufficient to warrant a discharge through
medical channels.  Therefore, this Board concludes that there is
insufficient evidence to substantiate the applicant’s contention that the
FSM was suffering from PTSD while he was in the Army.  During the
examination, the FSM stated that he had been miserable while he was in the
Army and that his service had been unsatisfactory even to himself.

5.  The FSM was convicted by two summary court-martials and three special
court-martials as a result of his misconduct and he had approximately 434
days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.  Considering his numerous
acts of indiscipline, it does not appear that the type of discharge that he
received is too severe.  His undesirable discharge appropriately reflects
his overall record of service.



6.  The Board has also noted the applicant’s contentions regarding the
FSM’s combat service; his award of the Purple Heart; his age at the time of
his enlistment in the Army; and the decision made by the VA.  However, none
of these factors, either individually or in sum, are sufficiently
mitigating to warrant the relief requested.  The fact that the VA, in its
discretion, has found the FSM’s Army service honorable for VA purposes does
not, in itself, establish honorable service for Department of the Army
purposes.

7.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in
error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would
satisfy this requirement.

8.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

mdm____  jdm_____  jbm_____  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.





                                  ____  Mark D. Manning__
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004103833                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20041207                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19531211                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 615-368                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |583/UNFITNESS                           |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  626  |144.6000.0000/MISCONDUCT                |
|2.  642                 |144.6115.0000/SERIOUSNESS OF OFFENSE    |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]