BOARD DATE: 5 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000695 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __x______ ___x_____ __x___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 5 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000695 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. BOARD DATE: 5 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160000695 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 general under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 2. The applicant states: a.  It was her understanding she was being chaptered out of the Army because she did not have a family care plan for her son. It was a very emotional moment for her, her first-born child, and her entire family. b.  Her grandmother developed Alzheimer's disease shortly before her discharge, which was the reason she was forced to pull her family emergency plan. She had no other reliable sources to serve as a caregiver for her son at that period in her life. She was uncomfortable allowing anyone that was a substance abuser, someone that was violent and unstable, or anyone that was otherwise abusive or unreliable to care for her son. c.  She was not given the opportunity to explain the issue during her discharge process. Had she been given the opportunity, she believes her commander would have granted her an honorable discharge. d.  She was later informed that her unit commander at the time granted her general under honorable conditions because he felt she did not adequately attend field training exercises. She could have informed her commander that his perception was inaccurate and she had attended field exercises. However, due to elements outside of her control, she was not provided the opportunity to defend herself. e.  Her commander at the time signed a memorandum admitting to error and recommended her discharge upgrade. (She did not provide a copy of this memorandum). f.  She never received any negative reviews, write-ups, Uniform Code of Military Justice actions, nor any letters of counselings during her enlistment. 3. The applicant provides * DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II), page 1 * DD Form 2648 (Pre-separation Counseling Checklist) * SGLV Form 8286 (Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance Election and Certificate, dated 11 February 2004 * Headquarters, U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery Center and Fort Bliss, Orders 182-0012, dated 30 June 2004 * Record of Emergency Data, dated 11 February 2004 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 31 May 2001. 3. Her Enlisted Record Brief, dated 20 May 2004, shows she received an adverse action flag on 2 February 2004. 4. On 8 June 2004, she was denied award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. 5. Her discharge package is not available for the Board to review. 6. On 8 July 2004, she was discharged with a service characterization as general under honorable conditions. She completed 3 years, 1 month, 8 days of creditable active military service and she was credited with 1 year of foreign service. 7. Her DD Form 214 shows in: * item 25 (Separation Authority) – Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-8 * item 26 (Separation Code) – JDG * item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – Parenthood 8. On 23 January 2013, the Army Discharge Review Board denied her request for an upgrade of her discharge. Additionally, she indicated she was providing a memorandum for record from her former commander recommending an upgrade of her discharge; however, she did not provide a copy. 9. She provided copies of her DD Form 2648, SGLV Form 8286, Record of Emergency Data, and separation orders. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the Army. Paragraph 5-8 (Involuntary Separation Due to Parenthood) states Soldiers will be considered for involuntary separation when parental obligations interfere with fulfillment of military responsibilities. Specific reasons for separation because of parenthood include: * inability to perform prescribed duties satisfactorily * repeated absenteeism * repeated tardiness * inability to participate in field training exercises or perform special duties * non-availability for worldwide assignment or deployment according to the needs of the Army 2. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends she was not given the opportunity to explain her issue during her discharge processing and her unit commander at the time signed a memorandum admitting error and recommended upgrading her discharge. She further contends she never received any negative reviews, write ups, Uniform Code of Military Justice actions, nor any letter of counseling during her enlistment. 2. Although her discharge package is unavailable for review and she failed to provide evidence from her former commander, her Enlisted Record Brief shows she received an adverse action flag on 2 February 2004. Further, she admits she pulled her family emergency care plan due to her grandmother's medical condition. Soldiers are subject to involuntary discharge when parental obligations interfere with fulfillment of military responsibilities. 3. It is incumbent upon the applicant to provide a compelling argument supported by corroborating documentation to show her records are in need of correction based on an injustice or inequity. In the absence of such evidence, administrative regularity is presumed with regard to her discharge. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000695 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160000695 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2