RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        16 August 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070003042


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. William D. Powers             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. William Blakely               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Donald L. Lewy                |     |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 undesirable discharge be upgraded to
honorable.

2.  The applicant states he has a mental health condition that caused his
actions at the time.  His actions were beyond his control.  He fulfilled
his enlistment requirements and was not allowed to be discharged by the
commander.

3.  The applicant states he provides mental health records from his current
provider; however, no additional evidence was attached to his application.

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 on 30 July 1966.  He
completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was
awarded military occupational specialty 13A (Cannoneer).

3.  Between March 1967 and January 1968, the applicant accepted nonjudicial
punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on four
occasions for failing to obey a lawful order, speeding, failing to repair
for guard mount, and being disrespectful in language toward his superior
noncommissisoned officer, respectively.

4.  Between April 1969 and October 1969, the applicant was convicted by two
summary courts-martial and two special courts-martial for offenses
including being disrespectful in deportment toward his superior
noncommissioned officer; breaking restriction; and being absent without
leave (AWOL).

5.  Medical records show that, on 16 July 1969, the applicant was
hospitalized “after taking an overdose of nerve pills because he was served
with court martial papers and didn’t want to go back to the stockade.”

6.  On 20 June 1969, the applicant’s company commander initiated action to
separate the applicant under Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness.  The
applicant was advised of his rights.  In an interview with an assistant
brigade chaplain, the applicant informed the chaplain that he wanted no
defense and that he wanted out of the Army regardless of the nature of the
discharge.

7.  On 22 July 1969, the applicant completed a separation physical
examination and was found qualified for separation.

8.  On 28 July 1969, the applicant completed a psychiatric evaluation.  The
evaluating psychiatrist diagnosed the applicant with sociopathic
personality with schizoid features, chronic, moderately severe, manifested
by impulsive behavior, little internal controls, and facility to blame
others for his difficulties.  No evidence of any mental condition which
would warrant disposition via medical channels was found.  He was found to
be mentally responsible both to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere
to the right.  He was found to have sufficient mental capacity to
understand and participate in board proceedings.  He was psychiatrically
cleared for any administrative or disciplinary action.

9.  On 13 October 1969, the appropriate authority approved the
recommendation to separate the applicant and directed issuance of an
Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

10.  On 15 October 1969, the applicant was discharged, with an undesirable
discharge and a characterization of service of under other than honorable
conditions, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-
212 for unfitness.  He had completed 1 year, 4 months, and 3 days of
creditable active service and had 253 days of lost time.

11.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic
authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  The regulation
provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent incidents of
a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, sexual
perversion, drug addiction or the unauthorized use or possession of habit-
forming drugs or marijuana, an established pattern for shirking, an
established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts or
failure to contribute adequate support to dependents, were subject to
separation for unfitness.  Such action would be taken when it was clearly
established that despite attempts to rehabilitate or develop him as a
satisfactory Soldier further effort was unlikely to succeed.
12.  Army Regulation 635-200, 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.

13.  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.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in
compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural
errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The applicant contended that he has a mental health condition that
caused his actions at the time.  Although he indicated that he provided
mental health records from his current provider no additional evidence was
attached to his application.  In addition, he received a psychiatric
evaluation prior to his separation.  The evaluation found the applicant to
be mentally responsible both to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere
to the right.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed
that he was evaluated by competent military psychiatric medical authorities
who psychiatrically cleared him for separation.

3.  There is insufficient evidence that would warrant granting the relief
requested.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__wdp___  __wb____  __dll___  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.




                                  __William D. Powers___
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2000003042                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070816                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19691015                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-212                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |A50.00                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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