RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        31 AUGUST 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050015896


      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:

|     |Mr. William Powers                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Jeffrey Redmann               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Karmin Jenkins                |     |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 to honorable.

2.  The applicant states that he was offered to either be reassigned to
Medic School or receive an early discharge.  He chose to take an early
discharge, but feels he was given these choices because of his
participation in group discussions concerning the Vietnam War.  He believes
he should have received an honorable and not a general discharge.

3.  The applicant provides a criminal records check, a photo, and numerous
character references in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 23 March 1971.  The application submitted in this case is dated
21 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 was inducted into the Army of the United States on 9
November 1971, for a period of 2 years.

4.  On 17 February 1972, he accepted nonjudicial punishment under the
provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent
from his appointed place of duty.  His punishment was a forfeiture of pay,
extra duty and restriction.

5.  On 9 March 1972, a bar to reenlistment was initiated by the applicant's
commander because of his failure to demonstrate the standards of conduct
and abilities required for military service, and his denial for promotion
to Private E-2.  His conduct and efficiency were rated as unsatisfactory.



6.  On 10 March 1972, the applicant's commander initiated action to
separate him for failure to qualify for and attain promotion.  His
commander noted that the applicant lacked maturity in his attitude and
conduct since being assigned to his company, and that it appears he is not
trying to do anything right.  He felt that the applicant had no potential
for continued military service and anticipated that if he was retained in
the Army he would continue to be a disciplinary problem.

7.  The applicant acknowledged that he understood his commander’s intent to
separate him and elected not to make a statement in his own behalf.

8.  On 13 March 1972, his intermediate and senior commanders recommended
approval of the applicant's discharge, with the issuance of a general
discharge.

9.  On 16 March 1972, the applicant's bar to reenlistment was approved.

10.  On 23 March 1972, the applicant was discharged with an under honorable
conditions discharge.  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States
Report of Transfer or Discharge) indicates he had 4 months and 15 days of
creditable service.

11.  A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable
conditions.  It is issued to a member whose military record is satisfactory
but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

12.  The applicant provides a Pennsylvania State Police Criminal Record
Check which shows he has no record.  He also provides several character
reference letters attesting to his high moral character, his
trustworthiness, his concern for social justice, his concern for the
community, and his high personal responsibility for his friends and family,
as well as being a patriotic American.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's discharge 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 therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

2.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s available records to show that
his discharge was unjust, or that he was coerced into agreeing to his
separation.

3.  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.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 23 March 1972; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on
22 March 1975.  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

___WP__  __JR____  ___KJ___  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.



                                  _____ William Powers_________
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050015896                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060831                                |
|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]