IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	 29 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130020636 


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 discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

* it is not a true representation of the facts of her case
* her character of discharge is impeding progress and growth 

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentary evidence.

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 6 February 1995 for a period of 4 years.  She completed her training and was awarded military occupational specialty 54B (chemical operations specialist).

3.  She went absent without leave (AWOL) on 27 April 1998 and returned to military control on 24 June 1998.  On 29 June 1998, charges were preferred against her for the AWOL period.  Trial by special court-martial was recommended.

4.  On 29 June 1998, she consulted with counsel and requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial She acknowledged that by submitting her request for discharge she was guilty of a charge against her that authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  She indicated in her request she understood she might be discharged under conditions other than honorable, she might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Department Veterans Affairs, she might be deprived of many or all Army benefits, and she might be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws.  She acknowledged she might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life because of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  She elected not to make a statement in her own behalf.

5.  On 21 August 1998, the separation authority approved the applicant's voluntary request for discharge and directed she be given an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

6.  On 14 October 1998, she was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  She completed 3 years, 6 months, and 11 days of creditable active service during this enlistment with 58 days of time lost.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Chapter 10 provides 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.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate.
	b.  Paragraph 3-7a 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.

	c.  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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends her character of discharge is not a true representation of the facts of her case and is impeding progress and growth.  However, her voluntary request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  She had an opportunity to submit a statement wherein she could have voiced her concerns; however, she elected not to do so.

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

3.  Since her record of service includes 58 days of time lost, her record of service was not satisfactory and did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant an honorable or a general 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)                                         AR20130020636





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130020636



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1