RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        21 August 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070004691


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Conrad V. Meyer               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Dale E. DeBruler              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Ernestine R. Moya             |     |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 discharge under other than honorable
conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable
conditions.

2.  The applicant states he believes he was young and foolish for taking
the discharge he was issued.  He believes he should have been given a
general under honorable conditions discharge.  He has not been in trouble
since his discharge.

3.  The applicant provides a DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of
Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an
applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations
if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided
in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a
substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is
granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the
applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are
insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant was born on 9 October 1962.  He enlisted in the Regular
Army on 26 February 1980.  He completed basic training and advanced
individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B
(Infantryman).

3.  On 9 March 1981, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP)
under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for wrongfully
using marijuana, for wrongfully possessing marijuana, and for failing to
pay a debt to a taxi driver.

4.  The applicant departed absent without leave (AWOL) on 21 June 1982 and
returned to military control on 9 August 1982.

5.  The final court-martial charge sheet and the discharge proceedings
packet are not available.

6.  On 17 September 1982, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1,
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, conduct
triable by court-martial, with a discharge UOTHC.  He had completed 2
years, 5 months, and 4 days of creditable active service and had 49 days of
lost time.

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
submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial
by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges
have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt.
A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered
appropriate.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general
discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When
authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory
but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A
characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the
reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such
characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  It is noted that the applicant was 17 years old when he enlisted.
However, he successfully completed basic training and advanced individual
training and should have known the Army’s standards of conduct.  He was
made aware, when he accepted NJP in 1981, that misconduct is punished.

2.  Although the applicant’s discharge packet is not available, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary it is presumed that the discharge
proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations
applicable at the time and that the characterization of his discharge as
UOTHC appropriately characterizes his overall record of service.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__cvm___  __ded___  __erm___  DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.




                                  __Conrad V. Meyer_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070004691                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070821                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UOTHC                                   |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19820917                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, ch 10                       |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |A70.00                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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