RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        14 NOVEMBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060004443


      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 that his records be corrected by upgrading his
discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states that the mistake was a one time occurrence, and he
was never given a chance to receive help.  He did not realize his discharge
would affect his chance of receiving help for school.

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
7 May 1986.  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 5 August 1982, for a
period of
4 years.  He served in Germany from August 1984 to May 1986.

4.  On 3 August 1985, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the
provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for
disobeying a lawful order.  His punishment included restriction, extra duty
and a forfeiture of pay.

5.  On 26 March 1986, the applicant accepted NJP under the provisions of
Article 15, UCMJ, for the wrongful possession and use of marijuana/hashish.
 His punishment included reduction to pay grade E-2, and a forfeiture of
pay.

6.  On 7 April 1986, the applicant was notified by his commander that he
was initiating action to separate him from the service for unsatisfactory
performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13,
for his inability to perform his duties effectively, and his unlikely
advancement potential.  He was advised of his rights and waiver options.
7.  The applicant, after consulting with legal counsel, acknowledged that
he had been advised of the basis for his commander's action to separate him
from the service.  He acknowledged that he understood he could encounter
substantial prejudices in civilian life if a general discharge was issued
to him.

8.  The applicant's commander recommended his discharge under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory
performance, with the issuance of a general discharge.  His commander noted
that in his judgment the applicant would not develop sufficiently to
participate satisfactory in further training to become a satisfactory
Soldier.  His retention in the unit and the US Army would have an adverse
impact on military discipline, moral, and good order, and it was likely
that he would continue to be a disruptive influence in his current and
future duty assignments.

9.  The appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, and directed
the issuance of a general discharge.

10.  On 7 May 1986, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of
Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.  His
DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
indicates he was discharged under honorable conditions and had 3 years, 9
months, and 3 days of active service.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and
outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory
performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate
a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member
will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further
training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.

12.  Army Regulation 635-200 also 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.

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 type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were
appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

3.  There is no evidence and the applicant has not provided any to support
his contention that he was never given a chance to receive help.  There is
no indication in his records that he tried to seek help or to improve his
performance.

4.  The applicant's contention that he was unaware that his discharge would
affect his chances of receiving help for school is without merit.  He
signed a statement in which he acknowledged he understood the ramifications
of receiving a less than honorable discharge, and that he could encounter
substantial prejudices in civilian life if issued a general discharge.  He
signed his DD Form 214 and was aware of his characterization of service.

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 7 May 1986; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 6 May 1989.  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                 |AR20060004443                           |
|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]