RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        07 JULY 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040007241


      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. Gale J. Thomas                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Melvin Meyer                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Eric Andersen                 |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol Kornhoff                |     |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 his records be corrected by upgrading his
discharge.

2.  The applicant states that at his court-martial the true facts did not
come out.  He volunteered to take a discharge under the provisions of Army
Regulation
635-208, to avoid time in the stockade.  He was young and wanted to take
the easy way out, a choice that he should never have taken.

3.  He finished basic training at Fort Carson, Colorado, and transferred to
Fort Lee, Virginia, where he was placed in the company Honor Guard team.
The honor guard duties made him feel as if he was a part of something.  He
took pride in that assignment and did it to the best of his ability.  He
transferred to Germany and worked in a warehouse with German nationals.  He
enjoyed that type of work and learned the inventory process for a
warehouse.

4.  He states that things were great until after his mother’s death, when
he began to have signs of schizophrenia.  At the time he did not understand
what was happening to him.  At the time of his discharge he was diagnosed
with schizophrenia.  He still suffers from it but has learned to live with
his condition.

5.  His misconduct, as he remembers, was two fights, one with a Soldier
over wearing his suit, and the other in a bar where he was in an argument
with a Soldier and his friend.  During the confrontation one Soldier pulled
out a hand gun and he hit him with a rock.  His witness, who was a part of
the altercation, did not tell the truth at his court-martial.  He has
always felt that the court did not get all of the correct information.  He
states that his neck was cut by the second Soldier who was holding him from
behind, and that the court did not have that information.

6.  Since his discharge he has become a productive citizen.  He owns his
own internet business and does safety consulting.  He has a Bachelor of
Science Degree in Technical Management from Oklahoma City University, and
an Associate Degree in Business ITT from Scranton, Pennsylvania, as well as
several other management courses.

7.  He states that he wishes there was some way he could undo the harm he
caused both to the Army and to himself.  He has become a good citizen and
apologizes for his misconduct.

8.  In support of his request he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed
Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), a description
of Schizophrenia, and two letters from previous co-workers.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 March 1958, for a period of 3
years.  He served in Germany from March 1959 to December 1960.  At the time
of his enlistment he was 17 years old.

2.  On 11 December 1959, he was convicted by a special court-martial of
cutting another Soldier on his left shoulder and arm with a sharp object.
He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months, forfeiture of
pay for
6 months, and reduction to E-1.

3.  On 21 September 1960, he was convicted by a special court-martial of
striking another Soldier on the head with a rock.  He was sentenced to
confinement at hard labor for 6 months, forfeiture of pay for 6 months, and
reduction.

4.  The applicant’s company commander recommended that the applicant be
required to appear before a board of officers convened under the provisions
of Army Regulation 635-208, for the purpose of determining whether he
should be discharged prior to the expiration of his term of service.
Elimination action was being recommended because the applicant had been a
disciplinary problem since being assigned to his unit.  He had been court-
martialed twice for major offenses.  The applicant’s rating had been
generally good but his off-duty conduct resulted in his receiving several
reprimands.  The applicant had the physical and mental capacity to perform
in a satisfactory manner but refused to do so.

5.  On 19 October 1960, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant
acknowledged that he had been advised by counsel of the basis for his
commander’s action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-208.  He waived consideration of his case by a board of officers,
waived legal representation, and declined to submit a statement in his own
behalf.  He acknowledged that he understood that if he was issued an under
other than honorable conditions characterization he may encounter
substantial prejudice in civilian life,

6.  On 17 November 1960, a medical examination cleared the applicant for
separation.

7.  On 29 November 1960, a psychiatric examination determined that the
applicant was mentally responsible for his acts, and that there was no
mental disease or defect.  The applicant was able to distinguish between
right and wrong and adhere to the right.  The applicant’s medical records
contain no evidence of his being diagnosed with schizophrenia.

8.  On 20 December 1960, the appropriate separation authority approved the
applicant’s discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, with
an undesirable discharge.

9.  On 11 January 1961, the applicant received an undesirable discharged
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208, characterized as under
other than honorable conditions.  His DD Form 214 indicated he had 2 years
and 3 months of creditable service and 202 days of lost time.

10.  Army Regulation 635-208, then in effect, set forth the policy and
procedures for separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness.  Unfitness
included repeated
petty offenses/frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with military
or civilian authorities, sexual perversion, drug abuse, use of marijuana
and an established pattern of dishonorable failure to pay just debts.
Action to separate an individual was to be taken when, in the judgment of
the commander, rehabilitation was impractical or was unlikely to produce a
satisfactory soldier.  When separation for unfitness was warranted an under
other than honorable conditions characterization was normally considered
appropriate.

11.  The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to
upgrade his discharge.  On 19 April 1962, the ADRB reviewed and denied the
applicant’s request for upgrade.  The ADRB determined that the applicant’s
discharge was proper and equitable and that the discharge was properly
characterized as under other than honorable conditions.

12.  The applicant submits two letters from previous co-workers attesting
to his ability to work well with others, offering assistance and expertise
to anyone.  They mention his being honest and trustworthy, and someone they
had the utmost respect for.







DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and
regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is
commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

2.  The applicant’s contention that he was young is not sufficiently
mitigating to warrant the relief requested.  The applicant was 19 years old
at the time of his first offense.

3.  There is no evidence in the available records nor did the applicant
provide documentation to substantiate his claim that he had been diagnosed
with schizophrenia prior to his discharge.

4.  While the applicant’s post-service character is noted it does not
outweigh the seriousness of his conduct while in the military and does not
provide an adequate basis upon which the Board would grant relief.

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

6.  The actions by the Army in this case were proper, and there is no doubt
to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

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 that requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___MM__  __EA ___  __CK    __  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.




                                  ______ Melvin Meyer________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040007241                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050707                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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