MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 September 1998 DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-06474 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any) APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that the narrative reason for her separation be changed to hardship. APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that she would like the reason for her discharge changed in order to be entitled to education benefits; that she believes that in almost all pregnancy cases there is hardship involved and should be considered as such on an exception basis. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show: On 7 May 1991 the applicant entered the Regular Army for 3 years. At the time she entered the Regular Army she had already completed 1 year, 3 months, and 12 days of honorable service in the Army National Guard. The applicant’s record indicates that the highest rank she held while on active duty was specialist/E-4 and had earned the National Defense Service Medal and the Army Service Ribbon; however, there are no other documented acts of valor, achievement, or service warranting special recognition. The specific facts and circumstances of the applicant’s separation, under the provisions of chapter 8, AR 635-200 are not on file. However, procedurally the applicant would have had to have undergone pregnancy counseling which would have included comprehensive counseling on her options, entitlements, and responsibilities. At the conclusion of her counseling the applicant would have had to have completed a statement indicating that she voluntarily elected to separate by reason of pregnancy, under the provisions of chapter 8, AR 635-200. There is no evidence of record that the applicant was experiencing problems that would have qualified her for a hardship discharge, or that she ever attempted to pursue this course through her chain of command by either seeking assistance for problems or applying for a hardship discharge. The record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant, and listed the characterization of service as honorable, the authority for separation as chapter 8, AR 635-200, and the narrative reason for separation as pregnancy. The DD Form 214 also shows a that the applicant was separated from active duty after completing 2 years, 2 months, and 8 days of her 3 year Regular Army enlistment contract. Regulatory guidance clearly defines a pregnancy separation as a separation for the convenience of the government, not a hardship discharge. The eligibility requirements for education benefits are clearly defined and outlined in every soldier’s enlistment contract. In order to qualify for education benefits as a veteran an individual must complete at least 3 years of continuous active duty. This 3 year requirement is reduced under certain circumstances. When an individual is separated for convenience of the government, as is the case for pregnancy discharges, the 3 year requirement is reduced to completion of 30 months for those soldiers serving on an enlistment of 3 or more years. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for a change to the narrative reason for her discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 8 then in effect, provided policies, procedures, and guidance which allowed female enlisted personnel to request discharge, by reason of pregnancy. An honorable characterization of service was normal for individuals discharged under these provisions. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: 1. The Board notes the applicant’s desire to have hardship coded as the reason for her separation, and her contention that she was unaware that she would not be eligible for education benefits. However, the evidence of record shows the applicant voluntarily requested discharge by reason of pregnancy which procedurally would have required extensive counseling on her options and entitlements. 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. 2. The Board found no evidence of record or independent evidence submitted by the applicant which supports her contention that her separation should have been based on hardship reasons. The record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214, authenticated by the applicant, which lists the reason for discharge and shows the applicant did not complete the 30 months of active duty required to qualify for education benefits. This evidence attests to the fact that the applicant voluntarily requested separation by reason of pregnancy, and that she was fully aware of the reason for her separation at the time of her separation. 3. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement. 4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION Loren G. Harrell Director