RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        14 NOVEMBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060004314


      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. Curtis Greenway               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas Ray                    |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Peguine Taylor                |     |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 records be corrected by
upgrading his discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was told his discharge would
be upgraded after 6 months.

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of his
request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on
5 May 1988.  The application submitted in this case is dated 14 March 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 June 1981, for a period
of
4 years.

4.  On 2 October 1984, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP)
under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ), for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 4 September 1984 to 11
September 1984.  His punishment was reduction to pay grade E-2.

5.  On 20 February 1985, he accepted NJP under the provisions of Article
15, UCMJ, for being AWOL from 14 January 1985 to 16 January 1985, and from
21 January 1985 to 24 January 1985.  His punishment included reduction to
pay grade E-1, a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duty.

6.  The applicant's records include a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) which
shows the applicant was AWOL on 22 February 1985 and dropped from the rolls
as a deserter on 24 March 1985.


7.  The applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) indicates
he was AWOL from 22 February to 25 February 1988.

8.  The facts and circumstances concerning his discharge proceeding are not
in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release
or Discharge form Active Duty) indicates he was discharged under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the
service in lieu of court-martial, with an under other than honorable
conditions discharge.  His DD Form 214 shows he had 3 years, 10 months, and
19 days of active service and
1091 days of lost time.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, set forth the basic authority
for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation
provided, in pertinent part, that a member who had committed an offense or
offenses for which the authorized punishment included a punitive discharge
could at any time after the charges had been preferred; submit a request
for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-
martial.  At the time of the applicant’s separation, the regulation
provided for the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions
discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the
discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulation
applicable at the time.

2.  The Board notes that the applicant has failed to submit evidence in
support of his allegation that he was advised that his discharge would be
upgraded after
6 months.

3.  The applicant voluntarily requested separation under Army Regulation
635-200, Chapter 10, for the good of the service, to avoid trial by court-
martial.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall
record of military service.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

5.  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.


6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 5 May 1988; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 4 May 1991.  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

__CG ___  ___TR __  __PT  ___  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.




                                  _____Curtis Greenway_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060004314                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061114                                |
|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]