RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        11 January 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060008449


      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. Wanda L. Waller               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Bernard Ingold                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Ronald Gant                   |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward Montgomery             |     |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 discharge be upgraded to
honorable.

2.  The applicant states that he served his punishment for two minor
infractions but was released early without proper counseling before his
contract expired.  He also contends that he served honorably from 1979 to
1981, that it has been 23 years since his discharge, and that he has been a
good citizen.

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

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 11 April 1983.  The application submitted in this case is dated
17 May 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 on 25 January 1979 for a period of 3 years.  He
successfully completed One Station Unit Training in military occupational
specialty 36K (tactical wire operations specialist).  On 2 December 1981,
he was honorably discharged for immediate reenlistment.  He reenlisted on 3
December 1981 for a period of 3 years.

4.  On 10 August 1982, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the
applicant for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 19 July 1982 to 21
July 1982.  The continuation sheet to this DA Form 2627 (Record of
Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) is not available.  His punishment
consisted of a reduction to E-3, a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and
extra duty.

5.  On 4 October 1982, a bar to reenlistment was imposed against the
applicant.  This DA Form 4126 (Bar to Reenlistment Certificate) indicates
that the applicant’s 10 August 1982 nonjudicial punishment included the
offense of bad checks.

6.  On 10 March 1983, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the
applicant for failure to repair.  His punishment consisted of a reduction
to E-2, a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and extra duty.

7.  On 11 January 1983, the applicant was notified of his pending
separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14,
paragraph 14-12, for misconduct (pattern of misconduct).  His unit
commander cited the applicant’s inability to conform to military discipline
standards (repeated involvement in confrontations with military and/or
civil authorities in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) and
stated that retention on active duty was prejudicial to good order and
discipline and elimination was in the best interest of the U.S. Army.  The
unit commander recommended that the applicant be furnished a general
discharge.

8.  On 14 January 1983, the applicant consulted with counsel, acknowledged
notification of his proposed separation under the provisions of paragraph
14-12, Army Regulation 635-200, and was advised of his rights.  He elected
to submit a statement on his own behalf; however, no statement is
available.  Records show that as of 16 March 1983, the applicant failed to
submit a statement.

9.  On 22 March 1983, the separation authority approved the recommendation
for discharge and directed the issuance of a general discharge.

10.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 11 April 1983 with a
general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter
14, paragraph 14-12b, for misconduct (pattern of misconduct).  He had
served a total of 4 years, 2 months, and 17 days of creditable active
service.

11.  There is no indication in the available records which shows 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 active duty.  Chapter 14, in effect
at the time, established policy and prescribes procedures for separating
members for misconduct.  Specific categories included minor disciplinary
infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense,
conviction by civil authorities, and abuse of illegal drugs.  The issuance
of a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered
appropriate.  However, the separation authority may direct a general
discharge if such is merited by the member's overall record.

13.  Paragraph 1-18b of Army Regulation 635-200 states that when a
Soldier’s conduct or performance approaches the point where a continuation
of such conduct or performance would warrant initiation of separation
action for a pattern of misconduct, he or she will be counseled by a
responsible person about his or her deficiencies at least once before
initiating separation action.  Paragraph
1-18b(1) of this regulation states, in pertinent part, that additional
formal counseling is discretionary.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, 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 (emphasis
added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization
would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be
resolved in favor of the individual.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant as not
verbally counseled.

2.  Good post service conduct alone is normally not a basis for upgrading a
discharge.

3.  The applicant’s last enlistment included a 3-day AWOL period, a bar to
reenlistment, and two nonjudicial punishments.  As a result, his record of
service 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.

4.  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.

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

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged injustice
now under consideration on 11 April 1983; therefore, the time for the
applicant to file a request for correction of any injustice expired on 10
April 1986.  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

BI______  _RG____  __EM____  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.




                                  ___Bernard Ingold_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060008449                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070111                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |GD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19830411                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200 Chapter 14                   |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Misconduct (Pattern of Misconduct)      |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |144.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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