RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         3 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050006545


      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. Betty A. Snow                 |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Thomas D. Howard              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John Infante                  |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carmen Duncan                 |     |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 under other than honorable
conditions discharge (UOTHC) be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he would like to upgrade his
discharge because he would like to join a veterans’ club.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214),
and a copy of his work history in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 21 June 1979.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
21 April 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 and
entered active duty on 4 September 1975.  He was trained in, awarded and
served in military occupation specialist (MOS) 11B10 (Infantryman), and the
highest rank he held while on active duty was specialist-four (SP4).

4.  The applicant’s record documents no acts of valor, significant
achievement or service warranting special recognition.  The record does
reveal a disciplinary history that includes his acceptance of nonjudicial
punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ) on nine separate occasions and a special court-
martial (SPCM) conviction.

5.  The applicant accepted NJP on the following dates for the offense(s)
indicated:  22 April 1976, for being absent without leave (AWOL) on 6 April
1976; 1 March 1977, for leaving his post; 25 May 1978, for being AWOL from
12 May 1978 through 22 May 1978; 13 July 1978, for being disrespectful in
language towards a superior non-commissioned officer (NCO); 9 November
1978, forging the signature of another service member on a DD Form 689
(Sick Slip);
15 December 1978, for breaking restriction; 1 May 1979, for sleeping at his
post; 11 May 1979, for two specifications of failing to go to his appointed
place of duty; and 23 May 1979, for possession of marihuana and breaking
restriction.

6.  On 12 April 1979, a SPCM found the applicant guilty of violating
Article 90 of the (UCMJ) by striking a superior commissioned officer.  The
resultant sentence included reduction in grade to private E-1 (PVT),
confinement at hard labor for
4 months, and a detainment of $100.00 of pay per month for three hundred
and sixty-five days.

7.  The applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) shows, in
item 21 (Lost Time), that he accrued 45 days of time lost during one period
of AWOL and one period of confinement.

8.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no
separation packet containing the specific facts and circumstances
surrounding the applicant’s separation processing.

9.  The applicant’s record does include a DD Form 214 that shows on 21 June
1979, he was separated under the provisions of paragraph 14-33b (1), AR 635-
200 and received an UOTHC discharge.  This document further shows that at
the time of his discharge, he had completed 3 years, 8 months and 3 days of
creditable active military service and had accrued 45 days of lost time due
to AWOL and confinement.  It also shows that he earned a Marksman
Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar during his active duty tenure.

10.  There is no indication that the applicant requested an upgrade of his
discharge from the Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute
of limitations.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 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, conviction by civil authorities, desertion
or absence without leave.  An UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for
members separated under these provisions.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge so he could
join a veterans’ club and the supporting documents he submitted were
carefully considered.  However, this factor is not sufficiently mitigating
to warrant granting the requested relief.

2.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances
surrounding his discharge processing.  However, the record does contain a
properly constituted DD Form 214 that identifies the reason and
characterization of his discharge.  Therefore, Government regularity in the
discharge process is presumed.

3.  In the absence of any evidence of record or independent evidence to the
contrary, it is concluded that all requirements of law and regulation were
met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the
separation process. Further, the applicant’s discharge accurately reflects
his overall record of 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.  The evidence of record shows the applicant should have discovered the
alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 21 June 1979.
Therefore, the time for him to file a request for correction of any error
or injustice expired on 20 June 1982.  He failed to 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

___TDH _  __JI ____  ___CD __  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.




                                  _____Thomas D. Howard____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050006545                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005-11-03                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UOTHC                                   |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1979/06/21                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, Ch 14. . . . .              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Misconduct                              |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.000                                 |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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