IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  10 November 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110010856 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, she was pregnant at the time and going through many changes.  She believes she was suffering from postpartum depression which she did not experience with the two prior children.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting documentation.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 September 1981.

3.  On 7 March 1983, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for failure to obey a lawful order.

4.  The applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) from 9 through 15 September 1985 and from 17 September 1985 through 14 April 1986.  

5.  On 16 April 1986, after consulting with counsel and being advised of her rights and options the applicant submitted a formal request under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for discharge for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial, for an offense punishable by a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  She acknowledged that she was guilty of the charges or lesser included charges and that if the request was accepted she could receive a UOTHC discharge.  She acknowledged that such a discharge would deprive her of many or all of her benefits as a veteran, and that she could expect to experience substantial prejudice in civilian life if she received a UOTHC discharge.

6.  In a statement provided by the applicant in connection with her discharge request she stated that she went AWOL because her husband had taken one of her daughters and left the state.  She went AWOL to find her daughter.

7.  On 16 April 1986, she was placed on excess leave pending completion of her discharge action. 

8.  The separation authority approved her discharge action, directed that she be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade, and given a UOTHC discharge.  

9.  The applicant was discharged on 11 June 1986 with a UOTHC discharge.  She had 4 years, 1 month, and 15 days of creditable active service, 216 days of lost time due to being AWOL, and 57 days of excess leave.

10.  The applicant is shown to have had a son and two daughters (born on 6 September 1979, 19 August 1983, and 21 March 1986 respectively).

11.  The available service medical records do not show any complaints or finding of depression or anxiety over or during her third pregnancy.

12.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  It provides the following at:
	a.  paragraph 3-7a, an honorable discharge (HD) is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization of service is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty;

	b.  paragraph 3-7b, a general discharge (GD) is a separation under honorable conditions issued to a Soldier whose military record was satisfactory but not so meritorious as to warrant an honorable discharge;

	c.  paragraph 3-7c, a UOTHC discharge is issued when there is one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from conduct expected of a Soldier;

	d.  paragraph 3-7c(7), specifically addresses issuance of a UOTHC for discharges issued under the provisions of chapter 10 of this regulation; and

	e.  chapter 10, 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  UOTHC discharge is normally considered appropriate.  

13.  The Manual for Courts-Martial, Table of Maximum Punishments, sets forth the maximum punishments for offenses chargeable under the UCMJ.  A punitive discharge is authorized for offenses under Article 86, for periods of AWOL in excess of 30 days.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant states she was pregnant at the time and going through many changes.  She believes she was suffering from postpartum depression that she did not experience with the two other children.

2.  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.  There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress.

3.  In the absence of evidence that her misconduct was caused by postpartum depression (and it appears she went AWOL months before the birth of her third child), mental, emotional, psychological or psychiatric problems that contributed to her inability tell right from wrong and adhere to the right there is no basis to support her request.

4.  Based on the above facts and findings there is insufficient to warrant an upgrade of her discharge.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X___  ___X____  ___X____  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.



      _______ _ X_______   ___
       	   CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110005435



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110010856



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1