RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          26 July 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040008652


      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             |
|     |Mr. Richard P. Nelson             |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Patrick H. McGann Jr.         |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Leonard G. Hassell            |     |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 upgrade of her under other than honorable
conditions discharge to fully honorable.

2.  The applicant states that she feels her discharge should be upgraded
because she was expecting a child at the time.  She eventually had the baby
while she was on leave “but was AWOL a few days” because she could not find
anyone to care for her infant at the time.  She was young and did not know
what else to do.

3.  The applicant provides a letter of support from the Program Manager of,
what appears to be, a shelter for women.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error that
occurred on 19 July 1983.  The application submitted in this case is dated
4 October 2004.

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's military records show that she enlisted in the Regular
Army on 16 September 1980 for a period of 3 years.  She was trained in
Military Occupational Specialty 36K10 (Field Wireman) and served in Germany
with the 56th Air Defense Artillery.

4.  On 19 June 1981, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the
applicant for willfully disobeying a lawful order and disrespect to a
superior noncommissioned officer.

5.  The applicant went Absent Without Leave (AWOL) on 18 December 1981 and
was dropped from the roles (DFR) as a deserter on 18 January 1982.  She
surrendered to military authorities at Fort Knox, Kentucky on 25 January
1982.  The applicant went AWOL again on 8 February 1982 and was DFR a
second time on 9 March 1982.  She remained absent until 7 June 1983, when
she once again surrendered to military authorities, having been absent for
a total of 1 year, 5 months, and 6 days (including her first period of
AWOL).

6.  On 15 June 1983, court-martial charges were preferred against the
applicant for violation of Article 86 of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice for absenting herself, without authority, on or about 18 December
1981, from her organization, and remaining so absent until on or about 25
January 1982, and again from on or about 8 February 1982 until on or about
7 June 1983.

7.  On 16 June 1983, after consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted
a request for discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of
Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  She indicated in her request that she
understood she could be discharged under other than honorable conditions
and furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge
Certificate; that she may be deprived of many or all Army benefits; that
she may be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the
Department of Veterans Affairs; and that she may be deprived of her rights
and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.  She also
acknowledged that she may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in
civilian life because of an under other than honorable discharge.
Additionally, she elected to not submit a statement in her own behalf.

8.  The commander recommended that the applicant’s request for discharge be
approved and that she be discharged under other than honorable conditions.

9.  On 27 June 1983, the separation authority approved the applicant’s
request for discharge and directed that she be discharged for the good of
the service under other than honorable conditions and furnished an Under
Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.

10.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable
conditions on 19 July 1983 under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 10,
for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial.

11.  There is no indication in the available records to show that 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.  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.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, 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, 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.  A review of the applicant’s record of service shows that she did not
meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army
personnel.  The applicant’s entire record of service was considered.  There
is no record or documentary evidence of acts of valor, achievement, or
service that would warrant special recognition.

2.  The applicant voluntarily requested separation from the Army to avoid
trial by court-martial.  In doing so, she admitted guilt to the stipulated
offense.  Additionally, the applicant requested a discharge to avoid the
possibility of a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on her
records.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion
or duress.

3.  The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions
of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to
avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in
conformance with applicable regulations.

4.  Considering all the facts of the case, the type of discharge directed
and the reasons for separation were appropriate.

5.  The applicant’s contention that she “was AWOL a few days” because she
could not find anyone to take care of her infant is without merit.  In
actuality, the applicant was AWOL/DFR for well over a year.

6.  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.

7.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 19 July 1983; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 18 July 1986.  However, 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

____lds__  ____ldh _  ___phn__  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.




            ____Linda D. Simmons_______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040008652                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050726                                |
|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.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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