RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        12 December 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060006632


      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             |
|     |Mr. Dean L. Turnbull              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Allen L. Raub                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Frank C. Jones II             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Qawiy A. Sabree               |     |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 upgraded to a
general, or an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was unaware that his character
of service was under other than honorable conditions.  He states that while
he was not a model Soldier, he was age 17, mixed up, brash, and arrogant.
He has finally realized after 30 years that he had "taken a wrong turn"
with his arrogance and attitude towards the military.

3.  Also, he states that over the past 20 years, he has made a vast
improvement by raising a family and maintaining steady employment.  He
further states that he is now a productive individual and all he wants is
his discharge to be changed to a general discharge and to have a different
reason for separation.

4.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the
United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 15 April 1972, the date of his discharge from active duty.  The
application submitted in this case is dated 29 April 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’s records show he entered active duty on 12 July 1971.
He entered basic combat training but was unable to complete the prescribed
training.

4.  On 11 September 1971, the applicant was charged and convicted by a
Summary Court-Martial for one specification of being absent without leave
(AWOL) during the period 21 January 1971 to 21 August 1971.  His punishment
consisted of a forfeiture of $89.00 per month for one month, and
confinement for 30 days.
5.  His records show that he was AWOL and confined during the period 
10 September 1971 to 3 October 1971.  Also, he was AWOL during the period  
22 October 1971 to 19 December 1971.

6.  On 21 December 1971, the applicant was informed by his commander of his
intent to recommend his discharge for unfitness.  On 23 December 1971, the
applicant was advised of his right to counsel, his right to an
administrative hearing by a board of officers, his right to submit a
statement in his own behalf, and his right to be represented by counsel at
hearing.

7.  The applicant waived his rights.  In his waiver, he acknowledged that
he understood if he received an undesirable discharge, he could be deprived
of many or all Army benefits, that he could be ineligible for many or all
benefits administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and that he
could be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both
Federal and State law.  He also acknowledged that he understood that he may
expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life by reason of an
undesirable discharge.

8.  On 5 April 1972, the separation authority approved the recommendation
for discharge and directed that the applicant receive an undesirable
discharge certificate.  On 12 April 1972, the applicant was discharged.
The DD Form  
214 he was issued shows he completed a total of 5 months and 13 days of
creditable active military service.  The applicant had accrued a total of
113 days of time lost.

9.  There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge
Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statue of
limitations.

10.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic
authority for the elimination of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 6 of the
regulation provided, in pertinent part, that an individual was subject to
separation for unfitness because of frequent incidents of a discreditable
nature with civil or military authorities; sexual perversion including but
not limited to lewd and lascivious acts, indecent exposure, indecent acts
with or assault on a child; drug addiction or the unauthorized use or
possession of habit-forming drugs or marijuana; an established pattern of
shirking; and an established pattern of dishonorable failure to pay just
debts or to contribute adequate support to dependents (including failure to
comply with orders, decrees or judgments).  When separation for unfitness
was warranted an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a
general or an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states that he has made vast improvements and has been a
productive individual since his discharge.  His statement is noted;
however, his post-service achievements are not sufficiently mitigating to
warrant an upgrade to a properly issued discharge.

3.  Based on this record of indiscipline, the applicant's service clearly
does not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty
for Army personnel.

4.  The applicant's discharge was accomplished in compliance with
applicable regulations and there is no indication of procedural errors or
injustice that would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The evidence provides
sufficient basis for an undesirable discharge for unfitness.  Therefore, he
is not entitled to a general, or a honorable discharge.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
satisfactorily show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the
record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit
sufficient evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 15 April 1972; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on  
14 April 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

___alr___  ___qas__  ___fcj____  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.




                                  ________Allen L. Raub___________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060006632                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061212                                |
|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.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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