IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  24 March 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100020508 


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 reconsideration of an earlier request to upgrade his undesirable discharge to a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  he was medically evacuated in March 1964 to Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines where he was placed in a full body cast and had a traction pin through his right leg.  He was sent from that hospital to Brooke General Hospital at Fort Sam Houston in Texas.  He remained an inpatient at Brooke General Hospital for 6 months.  During this time, he was in traction and significant pain.  He became dependent upon pain and sleep medications as he was unable to sleep.  He was unable to sleep due to nightmares about Vietnam and his injury.

	b.  after his discharge from Brooke General Hospital he was given a 30-day leave and was then sent to Fort Rucker, Alabama in September 1964.  He began to self medicate with alcohol to help him sleep and cope with his depression and anxiety.  This is when things started to go downhill for him.  It seems all of his problems were caused from drinking.  He was drinking to cope with the stress of Vietnam and his injuries.

	c.  he was discharged in July 1966.  His original paperwork consisted of a General Discharge Certificate and a DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) which showed his character of service was undesirable.  He signed the original DD Form 214 (undesirable) but the copy he received does not have his signature.  It also shows his character of service was other than honorable and this is not what was on his original paperwork.

	d.  he made mistakes while in the service but these mistakes all came following his injuries in Vietnam and 6 months of inpatient treatment for his injuries.  Following his discharge from the hospital, he began drinking to help him sleep and forget.  He believes this was the beginning of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) only at the time he did not know what was wrong with him.  He was still on active duty service and no offers of mental health counseling were made.  He had significant problems with PTSD and his leg injury and believes it is in the interest of justice that he be able to obtain Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) benefits based upon his combat service in Vietnam. 

3.  The applicant provides a VA Form 21-4138 (DVA Statement in Support of Claim), dated 26 July 2010.

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 AR20090017413, on 25 March 2010.

2.  His contentions (all his problems were caused from drinking, he was drinking to cope with the stress of Vietnam and his injuries, he began drinking to help him sleep and forget, he believes this was the beginning of PTSD but he did not know what was wrong with him, he was not offered any mental health counseling, and he wants to obtain DVA benefits based on his combat service in Vietnam) are new arguments which will be considered by the Board. 

3.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 March 1963 for a period of 3 years.  He completed his training and was awarded military occupational specialty 67M (single rotor helicopter mechanic).  He served in Vietnam from 20 September 1963 to 24 March 1964.  While in Vietnam, he was wounded twice (23 January 1964 and 14 March 1964).  

4.  In February 1965 he was convicted by a special court-martial for stealing $150.00 from another Soldier.  His sentence included reduction to pay grade E-1, confinement at hard labor for 6 months, and a forfeiture of pay.



5.  On 26 August 1965 he was apprehended by civilian authorities for petty larceny.  He was tried and convicted by civilian authorities and sentenced to 
15 days in jail.  He returned to military control on 16 September 1965.  As a result of the applicant’s civilian confinement, he was subsequently convicted, on 27 September 1965, by a summary court-martial for being absent without leave (AWOL) between 26 August 1965 and 15 September 1965.  His sentence included confinement without hard labor for 6 months and a forfeiture of pay.

6.  On 17 November 1965 he appeared with counsel before an administrative separation board which was considering whether he should be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209 (Personnel Separations-Discharge-Unsuitability) for unsuitability.  The board ultimately concluded the applicant should be discharged for unsuitability based on apathy and character and behavior disorders and recommended he be issued an honorable discharge certificate.  The appropriate discharge authority approved the board’s findings and recommendation on 22 November 1965.  

7.  It is not clear from available records what transpired following the 
22 November 1965 approval of the applicant’s administrative separation board proceedings.  However, a statement in the applicant’s file indicates that as of 
6 December 1965 he was confined by civil authorities at the Pyke County Jail in Troy, AL pending civil action and by the time of his July 1966 discharge he was confined at the Kilby State Prison in Montgomery, AL.  A subsequent entry in the applicant’s file indicates he was convicted and sentenced to 18 months for burglary and grand larceny.  On 26 May 1966, he signed a statement indicating he did not intend to appeal his conviction.

8.  His DD Form 214 indicates he was discharged with an undesirable discharge on 8 July 1966 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations-Discharge-Misconduct (Fraudulent Entry, Conviction by Civil Court, AWOL, Desertion) prior to the expiration of his term of service.  The separation program number (SPN) 284 shown on his DD Form 214 indicates separation by reason of misconduct - conviction by a civilian court during current term of active military service.  His DD Form 214 shows he had 472 days of lost time.

9.  No evidence shows he was diagnosed with alcohol abuse or dependency, PTSD, or any mental condition prior to his discharge.

10.  In January 1976 the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s petition to upgrade the character of his discharge citing the applicant’s record of misconduct and ultimate conviction by civilian authorities.


11.  Army Regulation 635-206, in effect at that time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct.  The regulation provided for the separation of personnel for conviction by a civil court.  An undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

12.  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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant contends he had a drinking problem prior to his discharge, no evidence shows he was diagnosed with alcohol abuse or dependency.  

2.  He contends he was suffering with PTSD prior to his discharge but he did not know what was wrong with him.  However, no evidence shows he was having mental problems in 1966 that interfered with his ability to perform his military duties or that this was the underlying cause for the misconduct that led to his discharge.    

3.  He contends he was not offered mental health counseling.  However, no evidence shows he warranted mental health counseling.  

4.  A discharge is not changed for the purpose of obtaining DVA benefits.

5.  Based on the available evidence, it appears his administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  He signed a statement that he did not intend to appeal his conviction.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

6.  His record of service included one summary court-martial, one special court-martial, and 472 days of lost time.  It appears he also committed a serious civil offense while in the Army.  As a result, his record of service was not satisfactory.  Therefore, his record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20090017413, dated 25 March 2010.




      ____________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)                                         AR20100020508





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100020508



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1