RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        22 August 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050015616


      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:

|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Jerome L. Pionk               |     |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 or general discharge under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he came from an abusive family;
he was beaten, raped, and told that he was good for nothing.  He was
humiliated and abused in public and he was forced to go into the Army.  He
was told that if he would enlist in the Army he would become a man.  He
spoke to a recruiter and enlisted in the Army.  The recruiter told him that
after going through basic combat training, he would be sent to Vietnam to
serve his country.  When he entered the Army, he absolutely loved the Army,
but when he graduated his whole platoon went to Vietnam except for him; he
felt let down because he had finally been accepted by a group of men that
he had come to love.  He states, he never knew what love, trust and respect
were, so when they left he tried to go to another advanced individual
training (AIT) in Virginia, but no matter how he tried he could not fit in
anymore, so he gave up and left in shame.  He spent the remainder of his
time running away because it was something that he knew how to do.  The
applicant further states, that before he was discharged from the Army,
while awaiting discharge at Fort Polk, Louisiana, a riot broke out and he
saw a man get raped and once again he freaked out because he was afraid.
He states, that he was promised an honorable discharge if he would just
wait for two weeks but military authorities were trying to stop the rioting
and he wanted out that day so they gave him an undesirable discharge.  He
states that decision was the biggest mistake he had ever made in his life.
He would rather have died than to live with himself for leaving.  He
believes that the choices that he made at that time seem to be the only way
out.  He finally states that he loves his country and he has done things to
try to make things right.  He prays to God that he may be forgiven for the
way things happened in his life.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored personal appeal in support of
this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or
injustice, which occurred on 20 October 1970, the date of his separation
from active duty.  The application submitted in this case is dated 20
October 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 16
July 1969.  He was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational
specialty 76P10 (Stock Control and Accounting Specialist).  The highest
rank he attained was pay grade E-2.

4.  On 10 October 1969, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP)
for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 6 to 9 October 1969.  His
imposed punishment was a forfeiture of $29.00 pay, and 14 days restriction
and extra duty.

5.  On 13 February 1970, the applicant was convicted by a Summary Court-
Martial of being AWOL from 22 November to 19 December 1969.  He was
sentenced to a reduction to pay grade E-1, confinement at hard labor for
1 month, and to forfeit $82.00 pay.

6.  The applicant’s military record shows that he was reported for being
AWOL on
3 to 14 March 1969, and from 15 November to 18 December 1969.  However, the
applicant’s record is void of the facts and circumstances surrounding the
AWOL incidents.

7.  On 10 March 1970, the applicant was again reported for being AWOL.  He
was returned to military control on 11 August 1970.

8.  On 9 September 1970, the applicant underwent a separation medical
examination and was found fit for retention.

9.  On 10 September 1970, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation
and was found mentally responsible to distinguish right from wrong and
adhere to the right.  He was mentally competent to understand and
participate in the board proceedings.  He had no mental or physical disease
or defect sufficient to warrant discharge through medical channels and was
psychiatrically cleared for any administrative or disciplinary action.

10.  On 16 September 1970, the applicant was advised by his company
commander that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions
of Army Regulation 635-212, by reason of unfitness.  The recommendation was
based on the applicant’s disciplinary record for being AWOL; for his
dislike for military service; for his lack of self-motivation; and for his
negative attitude.
11.  On 21 September 1970, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and
after being advised of the basis for the contemplated separation, its
effects and the rights available to him, he waived his right to
consideration of his case by a board of officers, personal appearance
before a board of officers, and his right to counsel.  The applicant did
not submit a statement in his own behalf.

12.  On 15 October 1970, the separation authority directed the applicant’s
discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness and
that he receive an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  On 20 October 1970,
the applicant was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of
the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) issued to him at the
time, confirms the applicant completed a total of 8 months and 28 days of
creditable active military service and that he accrued a total of 202 days
of time lost due to AWOL.

13.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic
authority, established the policy, and prescribed the procedures for
separating members for unfitness.  An undesirable discharge was normally
considered appropriate for members separating under these provisions.

14.  There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army
Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-
year statue of limitation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The contentions of the applicant was carefully considered and found to
have insufficient merit in this case.

2.  After carefully evaluating the evidence submitted by the applicant and
the evidence of record in this case, it is determined that the applicant’s
discharge processing was conducted in accordance with law and regulations
applicable at the time and that the character of his service is
commensurate with his overall record of military service.  The evidence of
record confirms that the applicant’s rights were fully protected throughout
the separation process.

3.  The applicant’s military record shows that he had an extensive
disciplinary history of military infractions and based on his record of
indiscipline, the applicant's service clearly shows that his discharge was
appropriate.  The quality
of service determined at the time of discharge was not consistent with the
Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by
military personnel.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an upgrade of his
discharge.

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

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 20 October 1970; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
19 October 1973.  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

__LDS __  __JTM___  __JLP __  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 D. Simmons___
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR                                      |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2006/08/22                              |
|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]