MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            24 October 2000   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000043432

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edwin S. Castle		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that his records be corrected to reflect an honorable discharge.  He states that he received a general discharge because of "overcrowding" in his specialty.  He notes that he was told he would receive an honorable discharge after 90 days and that he was too immature at the time to complete an entire tour of duty.  He submits no evidence in support of his request.

PURPOSE:  To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted and entered active duty on 20 January 1975 at that age of 19 with 
12 years of formal education and aptitude scores all over 100.

He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training prior to being assigned to Fort Campbell, Kentucky in June 1975.  In January 1976 the applicant was punished under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for possession of marijuana.  His punishment included reduction to pay grade E-1.

On 6 February 1976 the applicant's commander initiated action to administratively separate the applicant from active duty under the provisions of the Army's Expeditious Discharge Program.  His commander cited the applicant's "incorrigibility, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline [and] inability to adapt socially or emotionally" as the basis for the separation action.  The applicant acknowledged receipt, consulted with counsel and elected not to make any statements in his own behalf.

The recommendation was approved and on 11 March 1976 the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions.  He had 1 year, 1 month, and 22 days of active Federal service at the time.

Army Regulation 635-200 provides the policy and sets forth the procedure for administrative separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5, as then in effect, provided, in pertinent part, for the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP).  This program provided that an individual who had completed at least 6 months, but less than 36 months of active duty and who demonstrated (by poor attitude, lack of motivation, lack of self-discipline, inability to adapt socially or emotionally or failure to demonstrate promotion potential) that they could not or would not meet acceptable standards could be separated.  Such personnel were issued a general or honorable discharge, as appropriate.
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.

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

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.  Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

DISCUSSION:  The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 11 March 1976, the date the applicant was discharged from active duty.  The time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 11 March 1979.

The application is dated 2 June 2000 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.

DETERMINATION:  The subject application was not submitted within the time required.  The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___esc__  ____jtm_  ___mp___  CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION

    Carl W. S. Chun
    Director, Army Board for Correction
	                of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043432	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20001024	
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.	142.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.