RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         02 DECEMBER 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004106032


      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. Kenneth H. Aucock             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Raymond Wagner                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas O'Shaughnessy          |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Laverne Berry                 |     |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.  In effect, the applicant requests that his discharge under honorable
conditions be upgraded to honorable.

2.  The applicant states that since his discharge in 1976 he has not had a
drinking problem.  He did not know what he was thinking back then.  He was
in Germany and all that they did was drink.

3.  The applicant provides letters of support from three individuals and a
copy of his 22 April 1976 DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active
Duty).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was inducted into the Army on 21 May 1971, trained as a
cook, and in October 1971 was assigned to an engineer battalion in Germany.
 He was promoted to pay grade E-4 on 27 November 1971.

2.  On 5 June 1972 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under
 Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failing to go to
his place of duty on two occasions.  On 31 October 1972 he received
nonjudicial punishment again for failing to go to his place of duty.

3.  The applicant reenlisted for 6 years on 6 April 1973.

4.  On 30 August 1973 he received nonjudicial punishment for willfully and
wrongfully destroying an entrance glass door, the property of a German
National. On 9 January 1974 he received punishment for assaulting a
noncommissioned officer by striking him with his fist and for assaulting
his wife by knocking her to the ground, both instances on 23 September
1973; and for being drunk and disorderly on 3 November 1973.

5.  The applicant returned to the United States and in November 1974 was
assigned to an infantry battalion at Fort Riley, Kansas.  The applicant's
misconduct continued at Fort Riley, where he received nonjudicial
punishment on five occasions in 1975 and 1976, for numerous instances of
failure to go to his place of duty and for AWOL.

6.  On 22 April 1976 the applicant was discharged under other than
honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
chapter 13.  His    DD Form 214 shows that he had four different periods of
AWOL for a total of     41 days of lost time.
7.  The applicant's discharge proceedings are not available to the Board.

8.  On 26 July 1977 the Army Discharge Review Board upgraded the
applicant's under other than honorable conditions discharge to under
honorable conditions (General).  In so doing, it indicated that the
applicant was separated because of repeated misconduct; however, decided
that because of the nature of the applicant's offenses, evidence of
alcoholism, and his overall record, relief should be granted.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides for the discharge of enlisted
personnel.  Chapter 13, then in effect, establishes policy and prescribes
procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories
include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission
of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or
absence without leave.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge
is normally appropriate for a member discharged for misconduct.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant's discharge proceedings are unavailable to the
Board, regularity is presumed.  The applicant himself is not disputing the
facts concerning his discharge.  The Army Discharge Review Board noted that
he had been discharged because of his misconduct, with an under other than
honorable conditions discharge.

2.  Noted are the letters of support that the applicant submits with his
request.   The information provided in those letters and the applicant's
contention that he does not now have a drinking problem are not a
sufficient basis to warrant further upgrading his discharge.  The Army
Discharge Review Board upgraded his under other than honorable conditions
discharge to general.  Considering the nature, the frequency, and the
number of the applicant's offenses, this decision was more than fair, if
not lenient.  Further relief is not warranted.

3.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing
argument in support of his request.







BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__RW___  ___TO __  __LB____  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.





                                  ____Raymond Wagner_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004106032                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20041202                                |
|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]