IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  15 April 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090016137 


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 his 1971 undesirable discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant says he suffered a traumatic incident and was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  He says he was a medic at Fort MacArthur, California, and his duties included watching babies in the critical care unit.  He says his executive officer's child died of pneumonia during his watch.  He says he:

* felt responsible for the child's death
* became angry and emotional
* manifested his anger by hitting the wall and breaking bones in his hand
* began to be absent without leave (AWOL)

3.  He says he wasn't diagnosed or treated for PTSD.  He also says he served honorably for 2 years prior to the incident.

4.  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 entered military service in September 1969.  He successfully completed basic training.  In January 1970 he was assigned to Fort Ord, California, for advanced individual training and was promoted to pay grade E-2.

3.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he was attached to a medical holding unit at Fort MacArthur, California, in April 1971.  The record doesn't show he ever held a medical specialty or performed duties in a medical facility.  His records do indicate he received on-the-job training as a radio operator and performed those duties at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and Fort Hood, Texas.

4.  Between February 1970 and July 1972 the applicant accumulated more than 700 days of lost time due to AWOL and military or civilian confinement.  As a result of the various AWOL periods, he was punished twice under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and convicted by one special court-martial.

5.  In June 1972, while confined at Fort Riley, Kansas, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation.  The evaluation concluded the applicant was fully alert and oriented and his thought process was clear and level.  His mood was level and he wasn't depressed.

6.  On 30 June 1972 the commander of the Personnel Control Facility recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations - Discharge - Misconduct) because of his extended periods of unauthorized absences.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the proposed separation and waived his attendant rights.

7.  The separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed issuance of an undesirable discharge certificate.

8.  On 20 July 1972 the applicant was discharged.  He completed only 10 months and 1 day of active Federal service.

9.  References:

	a.  Army Regulation 635-206 provided for the separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct (fraudulent entry, conviction by civil court, AWOL, desertion).  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

	b.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) states the quality of service of a Soldier on active duty is affected adversely by conduct that is of a nature to bring discredit on the Army or is prejudicial to good order and discipline.

	c.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides 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.

	d.  Army Regulation 635-200 also 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant provided no evidence to substantiate his claim he suffered from a traumatic incident at Fort MacArthur, California.  The evidence doesn't show the applicant ever performed duties as a medic overseeing sick children.

2.  His records show he was attached to a medical holding detachment at Fort MacArthur in April 1971.  He began accumulating periods of lost time in February 1970, less than 5 months after entering military service and long before he was attached to Fort MacArthur.  He didn't have 2 years of prior honorable service as he argues.

3.  There is no evidence to indicate the applicant's administrative separation was not accomplished in compliance with applicable regulatory guidance and no indication of procedural errors that would have jeopardized his rights.

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

____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)                                         AR20090016137



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090016137



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1