RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:     .


      BOARD DATE:        17 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050001279


      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. W. W. Osborn, Jr.             |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Lester Echols                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John E. Denning               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Jeanette R. McCants           |     |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, in effect, that his general discharge be
upgraded to honorable.  He also requests that his social security number be
corrected.

2.  The applicant states that, while he was at the retraining brigade at
Fort Riley, Kansas, he was told that if he completed the program all
references to the initial infraction would be expunged from his record, he
would receive an honorable discharge and he would be restored to pay grade
E-5.  He was unaware that his record had not been expunged until he lost
his job with the U.S. Postal Service for failing to disclose that incident.
 He also contends that his continued service to his civilian community
warrants an upgrade of his discharge.

3.  The applicant provides copies of a 13 May 2002 State of Maryland Sales
and Use Tax License and his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation).  He also
provides a copy of his Social Security card showing "70" as the middle two
digit numbers.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 5 December 1974.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 24 January 2005.

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.  The applicant's military records show that, on 8 August 1972, he
enlisted for 2 years using a social security number of xxx-40-xxxx.  This
is the only social security number shown in the available records.

4.  He received accelerated advancement to pay grade E-2, completed
training as a field wireman and was advanced to pay grade E-3.  The
applicant was then stationed in Germany where he was advanced to pay grade
E-4.

5.  Before a special court-martial on 24 September 1974 the applicant pled
guilty to violating a lawful general regulation by possessing heroin,
Mandrax (methaqualone) and drug paraphernalia.  The approved sentence was
reduction to pay grade E-1 and six months confinement.

6.  The applicant was transferred to the retraining brigade at Fort Riley,
Kansas. On 6 December 1974 he was released from active duty due to the
completion of required active duty service.  He was transferred to the Army
Reserve (Annual Training) with his service characterized as having been
served under honorable conditions.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Separations), paragraph 2-18, as then
in effect, provided for the transfer of individuals who had completed their
active duty obligation.

8.  There is no evidence to show that the applicant applied to the Army
Discharge Review Board within the 15 year time limit.

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.  The type of discharge
directed and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the
facts of the case.

2.  There is no evidence to substantiate the contention that the applicant
was guaranteed an honorable discharge, restored rank or that the record of
his misconduct would be expunged.

3.  The applicant was never promoted to pay grade E-5.

4.  The Maryland sales tax license that the applicant submitted is noted
but there is no other evidence to show that his post-service behavior and
conduct is so exceptionally meritorious as to warrant the requested relief.

5.  There is no substantiating evidence to show that the proffered social
security card is that of the individual who served under a different
number.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 6 December 1974; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
5 December 1977.  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

_JRM___  __LE ____  __JED_ _  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.




                                  __      _Lester Echols_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR                                      |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051117                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |GD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19741206                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR35-200, paragraph 2-18 . . . . .      |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |A03.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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