RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            24 June 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2004100456


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


  The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James C. Hise                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Stanley Kelley                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Hubert O. Fry                 |     |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 discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states that he was released because of alcohol abuse.  He
attended and completed a substance abuse treatment program.  He served his
country but was young and influenced into drinking.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 12 February 1979.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 21 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.  The applicant was born on 22 August 1957.  He enlisted in the Army
National Guard on 14 January 1975.  He was ordered to initial active duty
for training on   7 May 1975 and was released from active duty on 6
September 1975 after being awarded military occupational specialty 13A
(Field Artillery Basic).

4.  The applicant was apparently discharged from the Army National Guard
and transferred to the U. S. Army Reserve.  He was ordered to involuntary
active duty on 19 June 1978.

5.  On 9 January 1979, the applicant completed a separation physical and
was found qualified for separation.

6.  The applicant received a bar to reenlistment on or about 12 January
1979.  His bar to reenlistment certificate shows he accepted nonjudicial
punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on 6 July
1978 for an unknown reason; on 2 October 1978 for disobeying a lawful
order; and on 4 January 1979 for disrespect.

7.  On 31 January 1978, the commander initiated separation action on the
applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5,
expeditious discharge.  The commander cited the applicant's lack of
personal motivation to meet even the minimum standards of discipline, his
serious problems adapting to military life, his disrespect to his
noncommissioned officers, and frequent disputes with his fellow soldiers.
Statements from the applicant's chain of command indicated he had a
drinking problem.

8.  On 31 January 1979, the applicant acknowledged notification of the
action and voluntarily consented to the discharge.  He did not submit a
statement in his own behalf.

9.  On 5 February 1979, the appropriate authority approved the
recommendation and directed the applicant be given a general discharge
under honorable conditions.

10.  On 12 February 1979, the applicant was discharged with a character of
service of “under honorable conditions” (a general discharge), in pay grade
E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5, paragraph
5-31.  He had completed a total of 11 months and 5 days of creditable
active service and a total of 4 years and 4 days of service for pay and had
no lost time.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  The pertinent paragraph in chapter 5
provides that members who have completed at least 6 months but less than 36
months of continuous active service on their first enlistment and who have
demonstrated that they cannot or will not meet acceptable standards
required of enlisted personnel because of poor attitude, lack of
motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or
emotionally or failure to demonstrate promotion potential may be
discharged.  It provides for the expeditious elimination of substandard,
nonproductive soldiers before board or punitive action becomes necessary.
No member will be discharged under this program unless he/she voluntarily
consents to the proposed discharge.  Issuance of an honorable discharge
certificate is predicated upon proper military behavior and proficient
performance of duty during the member’s current enlistment with due
consideration for the member’s age, length of service, grade and general
aptitude.  A general discharge is a separation from the Army under
honorable conditions of an individual whose military record is not
sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

2.  The applicant was not separated because of alcohol abuse although his
chain of command noted that alcohol was involved in his incidents of
misconduct.  However, he was able to successfully complete basic training
and advanced individual training.  He had over 4 years of total Army
service and should have known the standards of Army discipline.  The type
of discharge given was appropriate considering his overall military record
with due consideration given his age and length of service.

3.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 12 February 1979; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on    11 February 1982.  However, 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 RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jch___  __sk____  _hof____  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 C. Hise_______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004100456                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040624                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |GD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19790212                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, para 5-31                   |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |A04.00                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |