RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        6 December 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050006425


      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. Judy L. Blanchard             |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Bernard P. Ingold             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Donald W. Steenfott           |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. Montgomery          |     |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 discharge be upgraded to an
honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he would like his discharge
upgraded to an honorable discharge because he has received two Associate
Degrees since his discharge.  He is a pastor at his church, he is an Out
Reach Pastor at two churches, he manages two fast food restaurants and he
is a supervisor at A&T Telemarketing.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documents in support of his
application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or
injustice, which occurred on 15 January 1988.  The application submitted in
this case is dated
17 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.  The applicant’s record shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army on
15 January 1981, with 1 year, 4 months and 10 days of prior inactive
military service.  He completed the required training and was awarded
military occupational specialty 76Y10 (Unit Supply Specialist).  On 6
September 1983, the applicant reenlisted for 6 years, after serving 2
years, 11 months and 11 days of honorable active service.  The highest
grade attained was pay grade E-6.

4.  On 5 June 1987, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment for
violation of a lawful general regulation for two occasions of borrowing
money from subordinates.  His imposed punishment was a reduction to pay
grade E-5 (suspended for 5 months), a forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month
for 2 months,
45 days extra duty and restriction.

5.  On 25 August 1987, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for
writing 24 dishonored checks, for borrowing money from subordinates and for
lying to his commander on more than one occasion.  The applicant
acknowledged that he understood the unfavorable information presented
against him and elected not to make a statement.

6.  On 13 November 1987, during a command inspection, the applicant was
found to be in possession of cocaine.  He was apprehended, processed and
released to his unit.

7.  On 15 December 1987, a Soldier detected the odor of suspected Marijuana
emanating from the applicant’s room.  A search of the applicant’s room
revealed a homemade smoking device, which field-tested positive for
Marijuana.  The applicant was apprehended and advised of his rights, which
he invoked.

8.  On 23 December 1987, court-martial charges were preferred against the
applicant for the wrongful use of Marijuana, for the wrongful possession of
a trace amount of cocaine and for the wrongful possession of a smoking
device with screen.

9.  On 29 December 1987, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was
advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, the effects of
a discharge Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) and of the rights
available to him.  The applicant voluntarily requested discharge for the
good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial.  In his request for
discharge, he acknowledged that he was guilty of the charge against him or
of a lesser-included offense therein contained which also authorizes the
imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He further stated
that under no circumstances did he desire further rehabilitation, for he
had no desire to perform further military service.  He also stated his
understanding that if his discharge request was approved, he could be
deprived of many or all Army benefits, that he could be ineligible for many
or all benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA),
and that he could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under
both Federal and State law.  He further indicated that he understood that
he could encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life by reason of an
UOTHC.

10.  On 7 December 1988, the separation authority approved the applicant’s
request for discharge, directed that he be reduced to the lowest enlistment
grade and that he be discharged for the good of service under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10 with a Discharge
Certificate under Other than honorable Conditions.  On 15 January 1988, the
applicant was discharged accordingly.  The separation document (DD Form
214) he was issued confirms he completed 7 years and 1 day of creditable
active military service.

11.  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 UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.

12.  There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army
Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year
statute of limitations.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s good character and post service conduct were carefully
considered.  However, although his post service conduct is admirable, this
factor alone is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his
discharge.

2.  The applicant violated the Army's policy not to possess or use illegal
drugs, the applicant compromised the special trust and confidence placed in
him as a Soldier and knowingly risked his military career.  This misconduct
clearly diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an
upgrade of his discharge.

3.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was charged with the
commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive
discharge. After consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily
requested discharge from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial.  All
requirements of law and regulation were met, the rights of the applicant
were fully protected throughout the separation process and his discharge
accurately reflects his overall record of short and undistinguished
service.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily
appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to
submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 15 January 1988, therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
14 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

__BPI___  __DWS__  __EEM__  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.




                                  ____ Bernard P. Ingold_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050006425                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051206                                |
|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.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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