IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 21 August 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20200001821 APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show her service was characterized as honorable. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552), dated 11 November 2019 * DD Form 256N (Honorable Discharge Certificate), United States Navy, awarded on 27 May 1993 * DD Form 214, for the period ending 17 November 1993 * letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), dated 21 December 1993 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), Section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states, in effect, she completed her advanced individual training (AIT) and was informed that she was needed at home per her mother’s request. a. Her mother was caring for her six year old son; she was not informed of the nature of why she was needed. She was informed that she would be discharged with a hardship discharge; she was discharged in a matter of two days. She hopes to have the unjust way she was discharged corrected. She was young and was trying to make a better life for her and her son. Her mother had agreed to care for her son so she could enlist in the Army for training and service to her country. b. She was discharged from the U.S. Naval Reserve as an E-4 and enlisted in the Regular Army the next day. She attended basic training and then went to AIT for training as an air traffic controller, which she completed. She was sent to Fort Campbell for her first duty station. She learned that she would receive a hardship discharge to go home and care for her son and a reenlistment code of "JGA," which was a discharge due to pregnancy, which was not the case. 3. The applicant had prior service in the Naval Reserve; she was issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate on 27 May 1993. 4. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 May 1993. Her DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record – Part II) indicates she completed basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, and attended AIT at Fort Rucker, Alabama; however, it further indicates she did not complete her AIT training. 5. The applicant was formally counseled on 13 October and 8 November 1993 for: * a congressional inquiry regarding a dependency discharge, failure to provide documentation of custody of child * request and decision for elimination under Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 11 6. On 12 November 1993, the applicant's commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate actions to separate her from service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11, for entry level performance and conduct due to her inability to adapt to the military environment. The applicant was advised that her service would be uncharacterized. 7. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation notification memorandum on 12 November 1993. She requested to consult with counsel and elected to submit a statement in her own behalf, wherein she stated, in effect, that she requested a Chapter 11 because of personal problems that arrived while she was on active duty. She was counseled by her first sergeant, who told her that she could not get out of the Army on a dependency discharge. Her mother was not able to care for her son and requested assistance from her Senator to have her discharged to return home and have custody of her child. The Secretary of the Army called and spoke with her mother and the Secretary of the Army said "[he] wanted to help me and I could get a Chapter 11 or stay in the Army and see how things work out." I decided to request a Chapter 11 due to my dependency problems. 8. The applicant's commander formally recommended the applicant for separation from service on 12 November 1993, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11, for entry level performance and conduct. 9. The applicant's record is void of the separation authority approval for an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11. 10. The applicant was discharged on 17 November 1993, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 11, by reason of entry level performance and conduct. The DD Form 214 she was issued shows she completed 5 months and 20 days of net active service and was not awarded a military occupational specialty. 11. Soldiers are considered to be in an entry-level status when they are within their first 180 days of active duty service. The evidence of record shows the applicant was in an entry-level status at the time of her separation. BOARD DISCUSSION: The Board agreed that the evidence confirms the applicant was in an entry-level status when she was discharged from the Regular Army, and as such her service was uncharacterized in accordance with the governing regulation. The Board found insufficient evidence of mitigating factors that would support a recommendation for relief in this case. The Board determined the fact that her service was uncharacterized is not an error or unjust. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :XXX :XXX :XXX DENY APPLICATION 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. 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the policies, standards, and procedures to insure the readiness and competency of the force while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Soldiers for a variety of reasons. This regulation provided that: a. A separation would be described as entry level with uncharacterized service if the Soldier had less than 180 days of continuous active duty service at the time separation action was initiated. b. 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. Chapter 11 provided for the separation of personnel because of unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) while in an entry-level status. When separation of a Soldier in an entry-level status was warranted because of unsatisfactory performance or minor disciplinary infractions (or both) as evidenced by inability, lack of reasonable effort, or failure to adapt to the military environment, he or she would normally be separated per this chapter. Service would be uncharacterized for entry-level separation under the provisions of this chapter //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20200001821 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20200001821 5 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20200001821 4