RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        12 JANUARY 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004975


      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:

|     |Ms. Linda Simmons                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Rodney Barber                 |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Rea Nuppenau                  |     |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 records be corrected by upgrading his
discharge.

2.  The applicant states that his mistake was made because he and his
spouse were under extreme stress with his being in a combat unit.  He
states his depression and other mental health issues were not addressed.
He asked his chain of command for help but was told that field duty was
more important.  His drinking increased and with his depression, he lost
his military career and his marriage.  His discharge has caused him
problems at work and an upgrade would help not only with his mental health
issues, but would also help his wife and kids with benefits.

3.  The applicant provides no evidence in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 19 January 1988.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 22 March 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.  Records show the applicant enlisted and entered active duty on 1 June
1981, and reenlisted on 11 April 1986 for 6 years.  The applicant was
stationed in Hawaii form November 1982 to October 1985.

4.  Documents in the applicant’s records indicate he was absent without
leave (AWOL) on 2 May 1987, and dropped from the rolls on 2 June 1987.

5.  A DD Form 616 (Report of Return of Absentee) indicates the applicant
surrendered to military authorities on 14 September 1987.



6.  The applicant’s available medical records show no indication that he
was ever treated for depression or had any other mental health issues.

7.  The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge
proceedings are not in the available records, however, on 19 January 1988,
he was discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, under other
than honorable conditions.

8.  Orders 6-951, Headquarters, 7th infantry Division, Fort Ord,
California, dated 11 January 1988, show the applicant was reduced to
Private E-1 effective
4 January 1988, and discharged on 19 January 1988.

9.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 (certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty) indicates he was discharged on 19 January 1988, under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the
service in lieu of court-martial.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, set forth the basic authority
for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation
provided, in pertinent part, that a member who had committed an offense or
offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge
could at any time after the charges had been preferred, submit a request
for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-
martial.  At the time of the applicant’s separation, the regulation
provided for the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions
discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the
discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulation
applicable at the time.

2.  The applicant voluntarily requested separation under Army Regulation
635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-
martial.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall
record of military service

3.  There is no evidence in the available records nor did the applicant
provide documentation to substantiate his claim that he was suffering from
depression and other mental health issues, or that he sought help from his
chain of command.


4.  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 requirement.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 19 January 1988; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
18 January 1991.  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

__LS____  __RB ___  __RN ___  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.




                                  _____Linda Simmons_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004975                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060112                                |
|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]