RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        19 July 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050018113


      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. Beverly A. Young              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James Vick                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Barbara Ellis                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Donald Lewy                   |     |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 general under honorable conditions
discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states he was so close to finishing his enlistment that
it was unfair to give him the type of discharge he received.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 9 July 1982.  The application submitted in this case is dated
29 November 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 January 1980 for a
period of three years.  He successfully completed basic training and
advanced individual training (AIT).  He was promoted to private first class
on 5 January 1981.

4.  On 21 January 1982, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under
Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failing to obey a
lawful order issued by a specialist five on two separate occasions and for
being drunk and disorderly in quarters.  His punishment consisted of a
reduction to the grade of private E-2 (suspended until 21 March 1982); a
forfeiture of $100.00; and extra duty for 14 days.  On 27 January 1982, the
suspension of the punishment of reduction to the grade of private E-2 was
vacated.

5.  On 6 May 1982, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under
Article 15, UCMJ for wrongfully possessing some amount of marijuana on or
about 18 March 1982.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade
of private E-1; a forfeiture of $128.00; and extra duty for 14 days.  The
applicant elected to appeal the Article 15.  A Judge Advocate considered
the appeal and indicated that the Article 15 was not legally sufficient.
The appropriate authority considered all the matters presented in the
appeal and ordered all punishments be set aside and all rights, privileges,
and property affected be restored.

6.  On 7 May 1982, the applicant was notified of his proposed discharge
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31.  The unit
commander cited the basis for the proposed actions as the applicant's
inability to adapt to the requirements of military duties.  The unit
commander indicated that the applicant’s expressed desire not to continue
active military service made further rehabilitation efforts impossible.

7.  On 20 May 1982, the unit commander recommended the applicant be
discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5 with
issuance of a general discharge.  The unit commander stated the applicant
had a history of minor misconduct and his personal standards were below the
minimum standards and acceptable level.  In addition, the unit commander
stated that counseling had been to no avail.

8.  On 21 May 1982, the applicant acknowledged notification of his proposed
discharge and submitted statements in his own behalf.  He stated he had
been in the Army about 2 years and 5 months and had 7 months left on his
enlistment.  He felt the charges (failure to adjust) were incorrect.  He
stated he had been adjusting to the military for over 2 years.  The
applicant referenced the unit commander’s statements regarding counseling
and he stated the only counseling he had was for drug and alcohol [use].
He stated he had a little problem with drinking too much, but this had not
affected his military performance.  He further stated he had worked in the
motor pool as a 63B.  He felt he was a good worker and good Soldier.  He
indicated he had two Article 15s, one for missing a formation in AIT and
one for being drunk and disorderly.  He did not feel that this was grounds
for putting him out of the Army.  He stated he was having personal and
financial problems at home.

9.  On 1 June 1982, the separation authority approved the recommendation
for separation and directed issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

10.  The applicant was released from active duty on 9 July 1982 under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-31h for failure to
maintain acceptable standards for retention.  He completed 2 years, 5
months and 26 days total active military service.

11.  There is no evidence which indicates that the applicant applied to the
Army Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.
12.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel from the Army.  Paragraph 5-31 of this
regulation, in effect at the time, governed the Expeditious Discharge
Program (EDP).  This program provided for the separation of service members
who had a poor attitude, who lacked the necessary motivation, discipline,
ability to adapt socially or emotionally or failed to demonstrate promotion
potential.  Under this regulation, a general or an honorable discharge was
considered appropriate.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable
discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits
provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the
quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of
acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is
otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly
inappropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in
compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural
errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The applicant's service record shows he received two Articles 15 during
the period under review.  The punishments imposed in his second Article 15
were set aside.

3.  It appears the chain of command determined that the applicant's overall
military service did not meet the standards for an honorable discharge as
defined in Army Regulation 635-200 and appropriately characterized his
service as general under honorable conditions.

4.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the
evidence of record that the type of discharge he received was in error or
unjust.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 9 July 1982; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 8 July 1985.  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

JV______  BE______  DL______  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.




                                  James Vick____________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050018113                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060719                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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