RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          19 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050002561


      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:

|     |Ms. Barbara Ellis                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Hubert Fry                    |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Robert Rogers                 |     |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 military records be
corrected to show that he was discharged in September 1968.

2.  The applicant states he was first discharged in September 1968 and he
was sent to California and his papers did not arrive with him.

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

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 15 June 1970.  The application submitted in this case is dated
5 February 2005.

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 limitation 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 was inducted on 21 September 1966.  He served as an
infantryman in Vietnam from 7 March 1967 through 9 June 1968.

4.  While in Vietnam, on 10 June 1968, the applicant went absent without
leave (AWOL) and returned to military control on 27 July 1968.
Reassignment orders show the applicant was to report to Oakland,
California, on or about 16 August 1968.  He went AWOL on 16 August 1968
from the U.S. Army, Returnee-Reassignment Station, Oakland, California and
returned to military control on
4 August 1969.  He escaped from confinement and went AWOL on
24 September 1969 and returned to military control on 26 December 1969.

5.  Charges were preferred against the applicant on 16 January 1970 for
being AWOL (10 June 1968 to 27 July 1968), two specifications of desertion
(16 August 1968 to 4 August 1969 and 24 September 1969 to 26 December
1969), escaping from confinement, and signing an official record with
intent to deceive.  In May 1970, the applicant voluntarily requested
discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
On 15 June 1970, the applicant was discharged with an undesirable discharge
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good
of the service.  He had served
1 year, 6 months, and 1 day of creditable service with 814 days of lost
time due to AWOL and confinement.

6.  There is no evidence in the available records which shows the applicant
was discharged in September 1968.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 of that regulation provides,
in pertinent part, that
a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized
punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges
have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the
service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  At the time, an undesirable
discharge was normally considered appropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant was discharged
in September 1968.  He had been returned to Oakland, California for
separation processing but he departed AWOL, again, before he could be
separated.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting his request.

2.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error now
under consideration on 15 June 1970; therefore, the time for the applicant
to file a request for correction of any error expired on 14 June 1973.  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

BE_____  HF______  RR_____  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.




            __Barbara Ellis_______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050002561                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051019                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.0200                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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