RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        21 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060002717


      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. William Crain                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Jeffrey Redmann               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. David Tucker                  |     |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 undesirable discharge be changed to
honorable.

2.  The applicant states he has been a good citizen since his discharge.
He states that his ability to serve was impaired because of marital, family
and childcare [problems].

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United
States Report of Transfer or Discharge), a supplemental letter, and three
character references.

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

Counsel states, in effect, that the evidence of record substantially
supports the applicant’s contentions.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 13 October 1969.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 7 February 2006.

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 on 10 May 1968.  He completed
basic combat training at Fort Bragg, North Carolina and was reassigned to
Fort Lee, Virginia for advanced individual training (AIT).

4.  On 15 October 1968, the applicant was convicted, pursuant to his plea,
by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL) on four
separate occasions from 2 August 1968 to 19 August 1968; from 22 August
1968 to 26 August 1968; from 5 September 1968 to 9 September 1968; and from
13 September 1968 to 20 September 1968.  He was sentenced to a reduction to
private E-1, a forfeiture of $46.00 pay per month for 3 months, and
confinement at hard labor for 3 months.

5.  The applicant was reassigned to the U.S. Army Training Center at Fort
Polk, Louisiana in December 1968 for training in military occupational
specialty (MOS) 76A (Supply Specialist).  At the successful completion of
AIT, he was awarded primary MOS 76A.

6.  On 29 January 1969, the applicant was convicted, pursuant to his plea,
by a special court-martial of being AWOL from 12 January 1969 to 19 January
1969.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 6 months and a
forfeiture of $25.00 pay per month for 6 months.

7.  On 19 August 1969, the applicant was convicted, pursuant to his plea,
of being AWOL from 27 June 1969 to 8 July 1969 and from 8 July 1969 to 4
August 1969 and for wrongfully and unlawfully uttering a worthless check.
He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 5 months and reduction to
the lowest enlisted grade.

8.  The applicant underwent a psychiatric examination on 23 September 1969
and was diagnosed as having no psychiatric disease.  He was found to be
mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to
the right, and he had the mental capacity to understand and participate in
board proceedings.

9.  On 24 September 1969, the applicant’s unit commander notified him of
pending separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212,
based on unfitness.  He was advised of his rights.

10.  The applicant acknowledged notification of the pending separation
action, consulted with legal counsel, waived consideration of his case by a
board of officers, waived personal appearance before a board of officers,
and did not submit statements in his own behalf.

11.  The separation authority approved the separation action and directed
issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

12.  On 13 October 1969, the applicant was discharged from active duty
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 for unfitness - frequent
incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities with
an undesirable discharge.  He completed 9 months and 20 days total active
military service with 259 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

13.  The applicant provided character references in support of his claim.
The individuals indicated that they had known the applicant for several
years.  He was described as being a diligent worker and a law-abiding
citizen.

14.  There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army
Discharge Review Board within its 15-year statute of limitations.

15.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic
authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 6a(1) of the
regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members involved in frequent
incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities were
subject to separation for unfitness.  An undesirable discharge was normally
considered appropriate.

16.  Army Regulation 635-200 governs the separation of enlisted personnel.
In pertinent part, it states that an honorable discharge is a separation
with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality
of the Soldier'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.
 Where there have been infractions of discipline, the extent thereof should
be considered, as well as the seriousness of the offense(s).

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 record of service shows he received three special
court-martials for being AWOL on seven separate occasions for a total of
77 days.  As a result, his record of service was not satisfactory and did
not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for
Army personnel.  Therefore, the applicant's record of service is
insufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

3.  The applicant contends that his ability to serve was impaired because
of marital, family and childcare [problems].  However, there is no evidence
of record which substantiates his claims.

4.  The applicant's character references concerning his good conduct are
noted; however, these factors are insufficiently mitigating to warrant an
upgrade in this case.

5.  The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the
evidence of record that the narrative reason for separation issued to him
was in error or unjust.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 13 October 1969; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 12 October 1972.  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

WC______  JR______  DT______  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 Crain_________
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060002717                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060921                                |
|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]