Department of the Army
                  BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
                      1901 SOUTH BELL STREET 2ND FLOOR
                          ARLINGTON, VA  22202-4508




                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:              JUNE 29, 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER   :   AR2004100267


      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             |
|     |Mr. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |


  The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Samuel Crumpler               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Lester Echols                 |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda Barker                  |     |Member               |

      The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

      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 general discharge be upgraded to
honorable.

2.  The applicant states that he does not agree with the psychiatrist's
description that he did not have the proper mental attitude to give
honorable service.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the last page of the recommendation
for elimination pertaining to his discharge.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 24 August 1962.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 20 October 2003.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  He was born on 16 April 1938 and was inducted in Denver, Colorado, on
8 December 1961.  He underwent his basic combat training at Fort Carson,
Colorado, and his advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Sill,
Oklahoma.

4.  Upon completion of his AIT he was transferred to Germany on 1 May 1962,
for duty as a cannoneer with Battery B, 2nd Battalion, 37th Artillery
Regiment.

5.  On 27 June 1962, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation as a
result of a referral from a dispensary physician who had seen the applicant
several times for increasing anxiety and poor adjustment to military life.
The examining psychiatrist opined that there was no evidence of major
neurotic psychotic process; however, his emotional instability reaction
with schizoid features was of such a chronic nature that it was not
amenable to rehabilitation efforts.  He recommended that the applicant be
administratively discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-
209.

6.  On 27 July 1962, the applicant's commander initiated a recommendation
to discharge the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-209, for unsuitability due to a character and behavior
disorder.  He further stated that despite numerous counselings by the chain
of command, the battalion surgeon and the post chaplain, he showed no signs
of improvement and continued to demonstrate that he did not have the mental
ability or motivation to give continued honorable service.  He also
indicated that the applicant had not been a disciplinary problem and rated
his conduct as good and his efficiency as unsatisfactory.  The applicant
waived his rights and declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.

7.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed that
he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.

8.  Accordingly, he was discharged at Fort Hamilton, New York, on 24 August
1962, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-209, for unsuitability.
He had served 8 months and 17 days of total active service.

9.  The applicant's record is void of any disciplinary actions and there is
no indication that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for
an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of
limitations.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 was revised on 1 December 1976, following
settlement of a civil suit.  Thereafter, the type of discharge and the
character of service was to be determined solely by the individual’s
military record during the current enlistment.  Further, any separation for
unsuitability, based on a personality disorder must include a diagnosis of
a personality disorder made by a physician trained in psychiatry.  In
connection with these changes, a Department of the Army Memorandum dated 14
January 1977, and better known as the Brotzman Memorandum, was promulgated.
 It required retroactive application of revised policies, attitudes and
changes in reviewing applications for upgrades of discharges based on
personality disorders.  A second memorandum, dated 8 February 1978, and
better known as the Nelson Memorandum, expanded the review policy and
specified that the presence of a personality diagnosis would justify
upgrade of a discharge to fully honorable except in cases where there are
“clear and demonstrable reasons” why a fully honorable discharge should not
be given.  Conviction by general court-martial or by more than one special
      court-martial was determined to be “clear and demonstrable reasons”
which would justify a less than fully honorable discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of records shows that the applicant’s administrative
separation on 24 August 1962 was accomplished in accordance with
regulations then in effect.


2.  However, the general discharge appears to be unduly harsh considering
that the applicant had a long-standing basic character and behavior
disorder which in all likelihood existed prior to entering the Army and may
tend to exist permanently.  Additionally, he had no disciplinary record or
lost time.

3.  Consequently, it appears that the above-mentioned memorandums should be
applied to this case and that his discharge should be upgraded to
honorable.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected
as recommended below.

BOARD VOTE:

sac_____  le____  __  lb___ ___  GRANT RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely file.
As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records
of the individual concerned be corrected by showing that he was separated
from the service with an Honorable Discharge Certificate on 24 August 1962.

2.  That the Department issue to him an Honorable Discharge Certificate
from the Army of the United States, dated 24 August 1962, in lieu of the
general discharge of the same date held by him.






            ___Samuel Crumpler____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004100267                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040629                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(GD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1962/08/24                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR635-209/ . . . . .                    |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |UNSUIT                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |(GRANT)                                 |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES                  |557/A42.00                              |
|1.144.4200              |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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