IN THE CASE OF:  	  

		BOARD DATE:  10 March 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140019486 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) for the period ending 24 March 1976 by:

   a.  upgrading his under honorable conditions (general) discharge to an honorable discharge;

   b.  correcting item 4 (Date of Birth) to show "21 June 1951" instead of "21 July 1950";

   c.  correcting item 9c (Authority and Reason) to something other than what is currently stated;

   d.  deleting the entry in item 10 (Reenlistment Code); 

   e.  adding his Vietnam service from 12 June to 10 October 1972;

   f.  deleting the entry in item 21 (Time Lost) and item 27 (Remarks) in reference to 22 days of lost time;

   g.  listing all awards and decorations he is entitled to include the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon; and

   h.  adding his subsequent U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) time. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and he contends that PTSD was the catalyst for his misconduct and subsequent administrative discharge.  The applicant bases his claim on a memorandum, issued by the Secretary of Defense, dated                   3 September 2014, entitled Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming PTSD. 

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement, numerous documents from his military personnel records, and medical documentation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). 

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 enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 3 July 1967.  The          DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record - Armed Forces of the United States) contained in his records lists his date of birth as "21 July 1950."  He completed training and he was awarded military occupational specialty 11D (Armor Reconnaissance Specialist).  He served in the Republic of Vietnam from 9 September 1968 to 3 April 1970 with Company C, 1st Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment and later with Troop C, 7th Squadron, 17th Air Cavalry Regiment.

3.  On 3 April 1970, he was honorably released from active duty as an overseas returnee and transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).  His            DD Form 214 shows his date of birth as "21 July 1950" and that he was awarded or authorized the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14)
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960)
* Parachutist Badge
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Bronze Star Medal
* Air Medal
* Army Good Conduct Medal
* 3 Overseas Service Bars

4.  His record contains a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214), issued by the Chief, Military Awards Branch, dated 13 April 2005, which shows the Bronze Star Medal was deleted from his DD Form 214 for the period ending 3 April 1970 and the Silver Star was awarded and added to his record.

5.  The applicant again enlisted in the RA on 2 July 1970.  His enlistment contract shows his date of birth as "21 July 1950."  However, his record contains a        DA Form 41 (Record of Emergency Data), dated 15 August 1975, which lists his date of birth as "21 June 1951" as he requests.  The form is authenticated with his and a witness signature.  His record also contains a DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) which shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam from    12 June to 10 October 1972 with Company B, 17th Air Cavalry Squadron.

6.  On 28 January 1976, charges were preferred against the applicant for:

* being absent, without authority, from his unit in Germany from               28 December 1975 to 20 January 1976
* breaking restriction on 31 December 1975

7.  On 5 February 1976, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the possible effects of a discharge under other than honorable conditions, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him.  Subsequent to receiving this legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested 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.

8.  In his request for discharge, the applicant indicated he understood that by requesting a discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charges against him or of a lesser included offense that also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and he elected to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The applicant submitted a history of his outstanding record of military service and spoke about the strain it placed on his wife and children.  Prior to departing for Germany, his wife was talking about getting a divorce.  He worried about losing his wife and children and he decided to get out of the Army at the expiration of  term of service.  He applied for 35 days leave and he went back home to make arrangements.  While at home he spoke with the squadron sergeant major about not returning to Germany and he requested to speak to Major General (MG) P_____ to no avail.  His wife went to the Red Cross but she was told there was nothing they could do for her.  Since he had tried to resolve his problems in a military manner to no avail, he went absent without leave (AWOL) hoping that someone would realize that he had a problem and would try to help him.

9.  His records contained a statement from his squadron commander who stated the applicant requested an extension of his leave which ended on 26 December 1975; however, it was denied by his unit commander.  The applicant subsequently went AWOL and he was arrested and returned to military control on 30 December 1975.  The applicant was restricted to the squadron area.  The applicant requested and received an interview with MG P_____ on the evening of 31 December 1975.  Special assistance by both the surgeon and chaplain was directed by MG P_____.  The applicant then broke restriction and was returned to military custody on 20 January 1976.

10.  On 18 February 1976, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he receive a general discharge certificate.  On 24 March 1976, the applicant was discharged accordingly in the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6.  The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he completed 8 years, 5 months, and 2 days of total active service with 22 days time lost.  The following information is contained on his DD Form 214:

   a.  item 4 lists his date of birth as "50 07 21" (or 21 July 1950);

   b.  item 9c states "Chap 10, AR 635-200 SPD KFS" (which means he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10 with  Separation Program Designator Code KFS);

   c.  item 10 contains a Reentry Eligibility (RE) Code of "RE-4";

   d.  item 21 contains the entry "22 days (10USC)" (which means 22 days time lost in accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code);
   
   e.  item 27 contains the entry "22 days lost under Title 10 USC 972 from         28 Dec 75 thru 29 Dec 75; and from 31 Dec 75 thru 19 Jan 76."

11.  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded or authorized the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star and one bronze service star
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960)
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Purple Heart
* Army Commendation Medal with oak leaf cluster
* Air Medal with numeral "2"
* Bronze Star Medal with two oak leaf clusters
* Army Good Conduct Medal (3rd Award)
* Parachutist Badge
* Drill Sergeant Identification Badge
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar

12.  On 15 August 1978, the applicant enlisted in the USAR for a term of 6years in the rank/grade SSG/E-6.  His record contains a DD Form 214 for his period of active duty training from 1 December 1978 to 25 June 1979 which lists his date of birth as "21 June 1951."  This form further shows he was awarded the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Bronze Star Medal with 2nd oak leaf cluster and "V" Device
* Drill Sergeant Identification Badge
* Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star
* Bronze Star Medal
* Army Commendation Medal with oak leaf cluster
* Parachutist Badge
* Purple Heart
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Air Medal with "V" Device

13. His record contains a DD Form 215, issued by the U.S. Army Personnel Command, dated 27 April 1998, which corrects his DD Form 214 for the period ending 25 June 1979 by deleting the Air Medal with "V" Device, the Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star, and the Bronze Star Medal and by adding the Air Medal with "V" Device and Numeral "3," Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, Aircraft Crewman Badge, Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Automatic Rifle Bar.

14.  His record contains a DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II) which shows he successfully completed the 60-hour Noncommissioned Officer Advance Course in 1982.

15.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement in which he claims:
   
   a.  he was unjustly discharged on 24 March 1976 when his expiration term of service was 1 July 1976.  The discharge was punishment for 22 days of being AWOL.  However, the AWOL was not intentional.  It was the end result of the PTSD that he suffered from which was not recognized, evaluated, diagnosed, or treated;

   b.  he self-medicated with alcohol to treat his PTSD and his marriage was in severe discord.  His military service up to this point was exemplary as evidenced by his service record.  Going AWOL does not in any way reflect his overall military service; it reflects an isolated incident for which he humbly requests to be forgiven; 

   c.  evidence shows he was wounded in combat and experiencing severe mental health issues as a direct result of combat actions.  While on leave recovering from his wounds, he went to his congressman's office and asked for assistance with the Department of the Army for help dealing with his mental health issues.  Per the congressman's request, the applicant was granted a compassionate assignment to a base in Pennsylvania; however, at no time did the Army contact him to check on his mental health until he received orders to Fort Dix, NJ, to report for duty as a drill sergeant;
   
   d.  he has no idea why he was attached to a unit without any form of mental health care so he treated himself by self-medicating with alcohol.  Upon assignment to his new unit he explained to the first sergeant his ordeal and told him he was having mental health issues and was not well.  The command moved him from drill sergeant to supply sergeant to better assist his recovery.  Later, he received orders for recruiting duty only to be reassigned after 10 months due to his mental health issues.  The stress of recruiting and his PTSD were not compatible.  He continued to receive no help for his issues and continued to self-medicate with alcohol for his PTSD;
   
   e.  in 1974, the applicant was assigned to Fort Hood, TX.  His troop was sent to Germany for 6months of training.  His responsibilities were minimal as a supply sergeant which was not enough to keep his mind off his mental health issues.  At a commander's meeting he broke down crying in front of the leadership.  It was evident his respect was gone.  The first sergeant let it be known his career was over.  It was obvious they wanted him out of the unit instead of getting him help so he applied for leave, went home, and was ambushed by his wife who told him she was having an affair;
   
   f.  he had suffered daily since being wounded; now, he didn't care.  He was having a complete mental health breakdown.  He continued to self-medicate with alcohol with the end result being 22 days AWOL;
   
   g.  in 1978 he served in the USAR and he was subsequently promoted to the rank/grade of sergeant first class/E-7.  In 1981, he served in the Army National Guard and he received an honorable characterization of service.  During this period he also received the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon;
   
   h.  due to the shame associated with his discharge documented on his        DD Form 214 he has not been able to be a member of any veteran's organization and he has had to live with the social stigma and limited opportunities for both public and private civilian employment.  His DD Form 214 does not reflect the overall service and sacrifice he made for his country.  Although he does accept full responsibility for his actions and remains truly sorry;
   
   i.  prior to his discharge he pled to receive help for his mental health issues of unrecognized PTSD; unfortunately, it fell on deaf ears.  His 22 day AWOL was a cry for help, but none came.  The end result is a military career and personal life which has been destroyed due to PTSD and combat; and 
   
   j.  the VA granted him 50 percent service-connected disability for chronic PTSD and ethanol abuse from his combat service in Vietnam.  In November 2003, the VA rated him unemployable and increased his service-connected disability to 70 percent for PTSD. 

16.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 10 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, 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 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.

17.  PTSD can occur after someone goes through a traumatic event like combat, assault, or disaster.  The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and it provides standard criteria and common language for the classification of mental disorders.  In 1980, the APA added PTSD to the third edition of its DSM-III nosologic classification scheme.  Although controversial when first introduced, the PTSD diagnosis has filled an important gap in psychiatric theory and practice.
From an historical perspective, the significant change ushered in by the PTSD concept was the stipulation that the etiological agent was outside the individual (i.e., a traumatic event) rather than an inherent individual weakness (i.e., a traumatic neurosis).  The key to understanding the scientific basis and clinical expression of PTSD is the concept of "trauma." 

18.  PTSD is unique among psychiatric diagnoses because of the great importance placed upon the etiological agent, the traumatic stressor.  In fact, one cannot make a PTSD diagnosis unless the patient has actually met the "stressor criterion," which means that he or she has been exposed to an event that is considered traumatic.  Clinical experience with the PTSD diagnosis has shown, however, that there are individual differences regarding the capacity to cope with catastrophic stress.  Therefore, while most people exposed to traumatic events do not develop PTSD, others go on to develop the full-blown syndrome.  Such observations have prompted the recognition that trauma, like pain, is not an external phenomenon that can be completely objectified.  Like pain, the traumatic experience is filtered through cognitive and emotional processes before it can be appraised as an extreme threat.  Because of individual differences in this appraisal process, different people appear to have different trauma thresholds, some more protected from and some more vulnerable to developing clinical symptoms after exposure to extremely stressful situations.

19.  The DSM fifth revision (DSM-5) was released in May 2013.  This revision includes changes to the diagnostic criteria for PTSD and Acute Stress Disorder.  The PTSD diagnostic criteria were revised to take into account things that have been learned from scientific research and clinical experience.  The revised diagnostic criteria for PTSD include a history of exposure to a traumatic event that meets specific stipulations and symptoms from each of four symptom clusters:  intrusion, avoidance, negative alterations in cognitions and mood, and alterations in arousal and reactivity.  The sixth criterion concerns duration of symptoms; the seventh assesses functioning; and the eighth criterion clarifies symptoms as not attributable to a substance or co-occurring medical condition.

	a.  Criterion A, stressor:  The person was exposed to: death, threatened death, actual or threatened serious injury, or actual or threatened sexual violence, as follows: (one required) 

(1) Direct exposure.
 
		(2)  Witnessing, in person.

		(3)  Indirectly, by learning that a close relative or close friend was exposed to trauma.  If the event involved actual or threatened death, it must have been violent or accidental.

		(4)  Repeated or extreme indirect exposure to aversive details of the event(s), usually in the course of professional duties (e.g., first responders, collecting body parts; professionals repeatedly exposed to details of child abuse). This does not include indirect non-professional exposure through electronic media, television, movies, or pictures.

	b.  Criterion B, intrusion symptoms:  The traumatic event is persistently re-experienced in the following way(s): (one required) 

		(1)  Recurrent, involuntary, and intrusive memories. 

		(2)  Traumatic nightmares. 

		(3)  Dissociative reactions (e.g., flashbacks) which may occur on a continuum from brief episodes to complete loss of consciousness. 

		(4)  Intense or prolonged distress after exposure to traumatic reminders. 

		(5)  Marked physiologic reactivity after exposure to trauma-related stimuli. 

	c.  Criterion C, avoidance:  Persistent effortful avoidance of distressing trauma-related stimuli after the event: (one required)

		(1)  Trauma-related thoughts or feelings.

		(2)  Trauma-related external reminders (e.g., people, places, conversations, activities, objects, or situations).
	d.  Criterion D, negative alterations in cognitions and mood:  Negative alterations in cognitions and mood that began or worsened after the traumatic event: (two required)

		(1)  Inability to recall key features of the traumatic event (usually dissociative amnesia; not due to head injury, alcohol, or drugs).

		(2)  Persistent (and often distorted) negative beliefs and expectations about oneself or the world (e.g., "I am bad," "The world is completely dangerous").

		(3)  Persistent distorted blame of self or others for causing the traumatic event or for resulting consequences.

		(4)  Persistent negative trauma-related emotions (e.g., fear, horror, anger, guilt, or shame).

		(5)  Markedly diminished interest in (pre-traumatic) significant activities.
Feeling alienated from others (e.g., detachment or estrangement).

		(6)  Constricted affect: persistent inability to experience positive emotions. 

	e.  Criterion E, alterations in arousal and reactivity:  Trauma-related alterations in arousal and reactivity that began or worsened after the traumatic event: (two required)

		(1)  Irritable or aggressive behavior

		(2)  Self-destructive or reckless behavior

		(3)  Hypervigilance

		(4)  Exaggerated startle response

		(5)  Problems in concentration

		(6)  Sleep disturbance

	f.  Criterion F, duration:  Persistence of symptoms (in Criteria B, C, D, and E) for more than one month. 

	g.  Criterion G, functional significance:  Significant symptom-related distress or functional impairment (e.g., social, occupational).
	h.  Criterion H, exclusion:  Disturbance is not due to medication, substance use, or other illness. 

20.  As a result of the extensive research conducted by the medical community and the relatively recent issuance of revised criteria regarding the causes, diagnosis and treatment of PTSD the Department of Defense (DoD) acknowledges that some Soldiers who were administratively discharged under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) may have had an undiagnosed condition of PTSD at the time of their discharge.  It is also acknowledged that in some cases this undiagnosed condition of PTSD may have been a mitigating factor in the Soldier's misconduct which served as a catalyst for their discharge.  Research has also shown that misconduct stemming from PTSD is typically based upon a spur of the moment decision resulting from temporary lapse in judgment; therefore, PTSD is not a likely cause for either premeditated misconduct or misconduct that continues for an extended period of time.

21.  In view of the foregoing, on 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged UOTHC and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider in order to determine if it would be appropriate to upgrade the characterization of the applicant's service.

22.  BCM/NRs are not courts, nor are they investigative agencies.  Therefore, the determinations will be based upon a thorough review of the available military records and the evidence provided by each applicant on a case-by-case basis.  When determining if PTSD was the causative factor for an applicant's misconduct and whether an upgrade is warranted, the following factors must be carefully considered:

* Is it reasonable to determine that PTSD or PTSD-related conditions existed at the time of discharge?
* Does the applicant's record contain documentation of the occurrence of a     traumatic event during the period of service?
* Does the applicant's military record contain documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms?
* Did the applicant provide documentation of a diagnosis of PTSD or PTSD-related symptoms rendered by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider?
* Was the applicant's condition determined to have existed prior to military service?
* Was the applicant's condition determined to be incurred during or aggravated by military service?
* Do mitigating factors exist in the applicant's case?
* Did the applicant have a history of misconduct prior to the occurrence of the traumatic event?
* Was the applicant's misconduct premeditated?
* How serious was the misconduct?

23.  Although the DoD acknowledges that some Soldiers who were administratively discharged UOTHC may have had an undiagnosed condition of PTSD at the time of their discharge, it is presumed that they were properly discharged based upon the evidence that was available at the time.  Conditions documented in the record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge.  In cases in which PTSD or PTSD-related conditions may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge; those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the UOTHC characterization of service.  Corrections Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service of UOTHC.  Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat-related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct.  PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct.  Corrections Boards will also exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct.

24.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations) in effect at the time establishes standardized procedures for preparation and distribution of the DD Form 214.  This regulation states that the DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.  The regulation required the preparer to enter the separating Soldier's date of birth in item 4.

25.  Change Number 15 to Army Regulation 635-5, effective 15 March 1972, changed the regulation to indicate Indochina and Korea service on or after 5 August 1964 by entering inclusive dates for Vietnam and indicating "Yes" or "No" for service in Indochina and Korea.  Where the record reflects assignment to an organization in Burma, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, or Vietnam, show "Yes" for Indochina.  For example, to show service in Vietnam only, enter "Vietnam – 6 Apr 70 through 28 May 71, Indochina – Yes, Korea – No."

26.  Army Regulation 635-200 states that individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge prior to discharge or release from active duty.  Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army, U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard.  Table 3-1 includes a list of the RA RE codes.  An RE-1 applies to Soldiers completing their terms of active service who are considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army.  They are qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met.  An RE-3 applies to Soldiers who are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but the disqualification is waivable.  They are ineligible unless a waiver is granted.

27.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) states that SPD codes are three-character alphabetic combinations which identify reasons for and types of separation from active duty.  The SPD code "KFS" is the correct code for Soldiers separating under the provisions of paragraph 5-11 of Army Regulation 635-200.

28.  The SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table provides instructions for determining the RE code for Active Army and Reserve Component Soldiers.  The cross reference table in effect at the time of his discharge shows that SPD code "KFS" has a corresponding RE code "3."

29.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the awards received by units serving in the Republic of Vietnam.  During the period in which the applicant was assigned to 7th Squadron, 17th Air Cavalry Regiment the unit was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  While he was assigned to 1st Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment his unit was cited for award of the:

   a.  Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for the period 5 May 1965 to 26 September 1970, by Department of the Army General Order (DAGO) Number 51, dated 1971; 

   b.  Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation for the period 15 April 1969 to 16 March 1971, by DAGO Number 5, dated 1973; and
   
   c.  although not more than one Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation will be worn by any individual, official military personnel and historical records will indicate all awards received.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request to correct his DD Form 214 for the period ending          24 March 1976 by:

   a.  upgrading his under honorable conditions (general) discharge to an honorable discharge;

   b.  correcting item 4 to show "21 June 1951" instead of "21 July 1950;"

   c.  correcting item 9c to something other than what is currently stated;

   d.  deleting the entry in item 10; 

   e.  adding his Vietnam service from 12 June to 10 October 1972;

   f.  deleting the entry in item 21 and item 27 in reference to 22 days of lost time;

   g.  listing all awards and decorations he is entitled to include the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon; and

   h.  adding his subsequent USAR time.  

has been carefully examined and found to have partial merit.

2.  The applicant's administrative discharge on 24 March 1976 was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no violation of his rights.  Although he could have been recommended for an UOTHC discharge for misconduct, his commander elected to recommend a discharge of general under honorable conditions.  The fact that he was discharged for this more favorable reason indicates his commander took into consideration the entirety of his military service and the severity of his misconduct, to include any mental health issues he may have had at the time of discharge.  Accordingly, his discharge and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

3.  An honorable character of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and 
performance of duty for Army personnel and an under honorable conditions character of service is appropriate for those Soldiers whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  The applicant's 22 days AWOL is considered misconduct.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable discharge, correction to item 9c, or deletion of the entries in items 21 and 27. 

4.  The evidence of record shows administrative errors resulted in an incorrect date of birth being entered on his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976 and also on his DD Form 214 for the period 3 April 1970.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his record to show his date of birth as 21 June 1951. 

5.  The SPD cross reference table in effect at the time of his discharge shows that SPD code "KFS" has a corresponding RE code "3."  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of item 10 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976 to show the reentry eligibility code "RE-3."

6.  His record contains a DA Form 20 which shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam from 12 June to 10 October 1972 with Company B, 17th Air Cavalry Squadron.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976 to show this service in Vietnam.

7.  Evidence shows the applicant completed training to support award of the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon in 1982.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976 to show this award.

8.  The DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.  It is not intended to document Reserve Component service performed after a Soldier's release from active duty.  Therefore, his USAR service from 1 December 1978 to             25 June 1979 would not be entered on his DD Form 214 for the period ending 
24 March 1976.

9.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows 7th Squadron, 17th Air Cavalry Regiment was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation during his period of assignment.  During the period in which the applicant was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment the unit was also cited for award of Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his record to show award of Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation (2nd Award) and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X___  ____X___  ____X___ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

   a.  deleting the entries in items 4 and 10 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976 and the date of birth entry in item 9 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 3 April 1970;

   b.  adding the entry "51 06 21" to item 4 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976 and to item 9 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 
3 April 1970;
   
   c.  adding the entry "RE-3" to item 10 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976;
   
   c.  adding the entry "Vietnam – 12 Jun through 10 Oct 72" to item 27 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976; and
   
   d.  adding the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation (2nd Award) and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation to his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976.
   
2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to upgrading his discharge to 




honorable and adding the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon and USAR service to his DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 March 1976.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20140019486





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140019486



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1