RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  15 November 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070008956 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Ms. Joyce A. Wright

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Margaret K. Patterson

Chairperson

Mr. Larry Bergquist

Member

Mr. Dale E. DeBruler

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, in effect, reconsideration of his earlier request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has enclosed a Findings, Order, and Application for Hospitalization, from North Dakota, for new evidence.  He states that he plans on going to the VA (Veterans Administration) Hospital, in Hines, Illinois.  He requests that his medical records be sent to the Board.  He states that the 3-year statute of limitations was misunderstood by him.  He was a victim of PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) when he had an accident while he was a passenger on a railroad commuter train in that he thought he was indestructible (Superman).  

3.  He jumped off the train while it was going more than 50 miles per hour.  He suffered a brain injury and was hospitalized for about 3 weeks which led to seizures and blindness.  He has low vision and is currently legally blind.  He is sorry about these things and his unbecoming conduct in the Army during his second period of service.  He does not know if he got PTSD during his first period of service, during his second period of service or, while he was in Vietnam.  

4.  The applicant provides a copy of a Findings, Order, and Application for Hospitalization, from North Dakota, in support of his request.

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 AR20060012110, on 3 April 2007.

2.  At the time the Board considered the applicant's request, his administrative separation packet was not available for the Board's review.  The Board concluded that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it was presumed that the applicant's separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulation and without procedural errors that would jeopardize his rights.  Therefore, it was concluded that the characterization of his discharge was proper and equitable.  

3.  The Board therefore, determined that the overall merits of the applicant’s case were insufficient as a basis for correction of his records to upgrade his undesirable discharge.
4.  The applicant's new argument is that, in effect, he was a victim of PTSD due to an accident and he is not sure if he was diagnosed as having PTSD during his first period of service, second period of service or, while he was in Vietnam.

5.  The applicant provided a copy of a Findings, Order, and Application for Hospitalization, in the matter of his mental health, dated 11 December 1964.  This document indicated that the applicant was a mentally ill individual and because of his illness, he would likely injure others or himself if allowed to remain at liberty.  He was also in need of custody, care or treatment in a mental hospital and lacked sufficient insight or capacity to make responsible decisions with respect to his hospitalization.  He was ordered to be hospitalized at the State Hospital at Jamestown, North Dakota, by order of the County Judge of Walsh County, North Dakota.

6.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 July 1961, for 6 years, with an established expiration of term of service (ETS) of 23 July 1967.  He served until he was honorably released from active duty on 11 July 1964.  He was transferred to the United States Army Reserve (USAR). 

7.  The applicant reenlisted on 9 July 1965.  He was issued an undesirable discharge on 2 May 1966, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, with his service characterized as under other than honorable conditions.

8.  The applicant’s medical records are unavailable for review by the Board.

9.  Army Regulation 635-208 set forth the policy for administrative separation for unfitness (misconduct).  Paragraph 1c(1) of the regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel where there was evidence of an antisocial or amoral trend, chronic alcoholism, criminalism, drug addiction, pathological lying, or misconduct.  Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgment of the commander, it was clearly established that rehabilitation was impractical or was unlikely to produce a satisfactory Soldier.  At the time, an undesirable discharge was normally issued.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, 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.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200, 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 (emphasis added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s new argument was carefully considered by the Board.  However, there is no evidence the applicant was diagnosed as having PTSD while he served on active duty.  The evidence the applicant submitted relates to an event or events that transpired during his break-in-service.  The applicant's claim he was a victim of PTSD due to an accident that occurred while serving in the USAR has also not been clearly substantiated.  This argument does not support an upgrade of his undesirable discharge.


2.  The applicant's medical records are unavailable for review.  It should be noted he was required to pass a physical examination for reenlistment purposes.  There is no evidence, and he has provided none, to show that he was diagnosed with PTSD during his first period of service or his second period of service.  A copy of his reenlistment physical is also not available in his service records.  

3.  The Findings, Order, and Application for Hospitalization, in the matter of the applicant’s mental health, dated 11 December 1964, presented by him, was prepared while he was a member of the USAR, between his first and second enlistments.  This document indicated that he was mentally ill and was likely to injure others or himself, if allowed to remain at liberty and was in need of custody, care, or treatment in a mental hospital.  He lacked sufficient insight or capacity to make responsible decisions with respect to his hospitalization.  This document shows that he was ordered to be hospitalized at the State Hospital at Jamestown, North Dakota, by the County Judge of Walsh County, North Dakota.

4.  This document, presented in support of his request for reconsideration, is not sufficient as a basis to upgrade his undesirable discharge.






BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___D____  __LB____  ___MKP   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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20060012110, dated 3 April 2007.




_____Margaret K. Patterson____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070008956
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20071115
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
UD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19660502
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-208
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
144
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.