RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        27 September 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070008227


      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             |
|     |Ms. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Richard T. Dunbar             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Chester A. Damian             |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. 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, in effect, that his undesirable discharge be
upgraded to an honorable or a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states that he enlisted in the Army to fight for his
country; however, he was not given the opportunity.  He states, in effect
that he was young and immature and that if he had been given the chance to
fight for his country, that is what he would have done.

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

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.  On 2 March 1970, he enlisted in the Army at age 18, in Dallas, Texas,
for 3 years, in the pay grade of E-1.  He successfully completed his
training as a plumber.

3.  The applicant's records show that he was absent without leave (AWOL)
from 25 June 1970 until 16 November 1970; and he was AWOL from 1 December
1970 until 15 October 1971.  His records show that when he returned to
military control, he was placed in pretrial confinement.

4.  On 24 November 1971, while he was in pretrial confinement, the
applicant was notified that charges were pending against him for being
AWOL.  He acknowledged receipt of the notification on 27 November 1971 and,
after consulting with counsel, he submitted a request for discharge under
the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the
service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  At the time that he submitted
his request for discharge, he acknowledged that he understood that if his
request for discharge was accepted, he may be discharged under other than
honorable conditions and furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

5.  Along with his request for discharge, he submitted a statement authored
by his counsel explaining that the applicant's father died in 1964 and that
he was 14 years old at the time of his father's death.  His counsel stated
that he quit school, left home and was living on his own.  The applicant's
counsel went on to explain that the applicant only had 8 years of civilian
education at the time of his enlistment; that he was married and had one
child; that his wife had two other children from a previous marriage; that
the applicant was plagued by family and financial problems; and that he was
faced with these problems when he went AWOL.  The applicant's counsel
stated that he believed that he could make more money as a civilian and he
believed that the additional income was necessary for him to be able to
support his wife and children and to help his mother.  The applicant's
counsel recommended the he be granted a discharge.

6.  The appropriate authority approved the request for discharge on 6
December 1971.  However, the applicant’s records show that he went AWOL
again on 9 December 1971 and that he remained absent until he returned to
military control on 12 December 1971.

7.  On 20 December 1971, the applicant was discharged under the provisions
of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu
of trial by court-martial.  He had completed 5 months and 11 days of net
active service and he had approximately 473 days of lost time due to AWOL
and confinement.  He was furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.

8.  A review of the available records fails to show that the applicant ever
applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge
within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.

9.  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.  A
discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered
appropriate.  However, at the time of the applicant's separation the
regulation provided for the issuance of an undesirable discharge.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  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.

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

3.  The applicant's contention that he was young and irresponsible when he
was in the service has been noted.  However, his contention is not
sufficiently mitigating to warrant the relief requested.

4.  The evidence of record indicates that while he was in the Army he had
approximately 473 days of lost time due to AWOL.  He submitted his request
for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial
and the appropriate authority approved his request.  He acknowledged that
he understood that if his request for discharge was accepted, he may be
discharged under other than honorable conditions and furnished an
Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  Considering the nature of his offense,
it does not appear that the characterization of his service is too harsh.

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

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__RTD___  __CAD__  __EEM__  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.





                                  ___Richard T. Dunbar____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070008227                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070927                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  689  |144.7000/REQ FOR DISCHRGE FTGOS         |
|2.  261                 |123.0000/AWOL/DESERTION                 |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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