RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        20 SEPTEMBER 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040010900


      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. James Hise                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas O’Shaughnessy          |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Patrick McGann                |     |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.

2.  The applicant states he had medical problems associated with addiction
which was reported for help but help was never received.  He states he only
received disciplinary action.

3.  The applicant provides an extract from his service medical records
showing his admission to medical officials that he continued to use
morphine, hashish and heroin.  He also submits the back side of a physical
examination which notes that he was suffering from excessive worry and
depression and had always been nervous.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 14 December 1978.  The application submitted in this case
is dated
26 November 2004.

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 limitations 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.  Records available to the Board indicate the applicant enlisted and
entered active duty on 5 September 1975.

4.  He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and,
in spite of 3 days of AWOL (absent without leave) while enroute to his
first permanent duty assignment in Germany in February 1976, by April 1976
he had been promoted to pay grade E-3.

5.  Between December 1976 and June 1977 the applicant was punished five
times under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for being
AWOL and absent without authority from his place of duty.

6.  In April 1977 the applicant underwent a physical examination as part of
administrative separation proceedings under Chapter 13 of Army Regulation
635-200.  It was that examination that the applicant included with his
application to the Board.  His records, however, do not contain copies of
documents indicating that the Chapter 13 separation had actually been
initiated or why, if one had been initiated, that it was never finalized.

7.  Chapter 13, in effect at that time, applied to separation for unfitness
and unsuitability.  Separation for unfitness included frequent incidents of
a discreditable nature, drug abuse, shirking, failure to pay just debts,
and failure to support dependents.  When separation for unfitness was
warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.

8.  The medical treatment document, provided by the applicant, notes that
on
25 July 1977 he was referred to the Army Hospital in Augsburg following a
positive urinalysis test for morphine.  During the referral the applicant
stated that he continued to use morphine, hashish and heroin.  The medical
document noted the applicant was not intoxicated at the time but that
active rehab was extended. The applicant was advised to come into detox but
he declined hospitalization.

9.  On 4 August 1977 the applicant was punished again under Article 15 of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice for two additional brief periods of
AWOL.

10.  On 30 August 1977 the applicant reported to medical personnel that he
had used heroin the previous day but was now feeling slightly more relaxed.
 He was prescribed medication.

11.  On 5 October 1977 the applicant was convicted by a special court-
martial of AWOL between 10 and 29 August 1977.  His sentence included
confinement at hard labor for 6 months.  He began his confinement at a
confinement facility in Germany but was subsequently transferred to the
Retraining Brigade at Fort Riley, Kansas.  He was ultimately returned to
duty at Fort Campbell, Kentucky in January 1978.

12.  On 24 March 1978 he was convicted by a second special court-martial of
AWOL between 6 February 1978 and 4 March 1978.  His punishment again
included confinement at hard labor.  The applicant was returned to the
Retraining Brigade on 5 April 1978.



13.  On 22 April 1978 the applicant departed AWOL from the Retraining
Brigade. He was apprehended by civilian authorities on 17 July 1978 and
charged with breaking and entering and theft.  He was returned to military
control on or about 13 October 1978.

14.  Although documents associated with the applicant’s administrative
separation were not in records available to the Board, his separation
document indicates that he was discharged “under conditions other than
honorable” on
16 December 1978, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter
10.  He was issued an undesirable discharge certificate.

15.  Just prior to his discharge, on 4 December 1978 he was punished under
Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for sleeping on guard
duty.  He also underwent a mental status evaluation which noted that his
behavior was normal, he was fully oriented, and his thought process was
clear and normal.  In his medical examination, conducted on 16 November
1968 he noted his health was good.  The physician found him medically
qualified for separation.

16.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides,
in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses
for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at
any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for
discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  A
discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered
appropriate.  However, at the time of the applicant's separation the
regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.

17.  There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge
Review Board to have his discharge upgraded.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing
argument in support of his request.  His contention that his medical issues
and addiction should justify or excuse his behavior because his pleas for
help were not heeded is without foundation.  Not only does his successful
completion of training and advancement to pay grade E-3 indicate that the
applicant was capable of honorable service his medical records indicate
when he was offered assistance for his addiction problem he choose not to
avail himself to that assistance.

2.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board concludes that
the applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in accordance
with applicable laws and regulations.

3.  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 request requirement.

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

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 14 December 1978; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
13 December 1981.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of
limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to
show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to
timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JH____  __TO ___  __PM ___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.





2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                                  ______ James Hise_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040010900                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050920                                |
|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]