ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 June 2021 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20210007620 APPLICANT REQUESTS: An upgrade of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show honorable or general service in lieu of uncharacterized service. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * DD Form 214 * Enlistment Medical Examination/Medical History * Medical Documents (11 pages) * DD Form 689 (Individual Sick Slip) * Certificate for Completion of Basic Combat Training * Diploma for completion of the Petroleum Supply Specialist Course * Petroleum Supply Specialist Graduation Announcement FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three-year time frame provided in Title 10, United States 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 he entered the Army on 18 September 1990 and served during Operation Desert Shield from 2 August 1990 to 28 February 1991. He completed basic training as well as the Petroleum Supply Specialist Course. He completed his training obligations to the Army and he was advanced to paygrade E-2. He never got into trouble. He had medical issues with his feet and ankles and often reported to the medical staff. After years of wondering about his discharge he believes his medical issues could have been a major reason for his discharge. 3. On 18 September 1990, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years. He attended basic training at Fort Leonard Wood, MO and advanced training at Fort Lee, VA. He provided a diploma and a graduation certificate for completion of the training requirements and award of military occupational specialty (MOS) 77F (Petroleum Specialist) on 5 February 1991. 4. While at Fort Lee, on 19 February 1991, the applicant was counseled by his commander about separation under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, due their interview and a “CMH” evaluation. 5. On 20 February 1991, the applicant was notified/advised that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of chapter 11, AR 635-200 (Entry Level Status Performance and Conduct). Additionally, he was advised. a. A chapter 11 discharge was uncharacterized, neither honorable nor dishonorable. His interview with the commander and CMH demonstrated he was not emotionally ready to adapt to military life and that it would be in the applicant’s and the Army’s best interest for him to separate now. b. The separation may result in substantial prejudice in civilian life. c. He was advised of his rights. 6. The applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of chapter 11, AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), due to entry-level performance and conduct. The immediate commander stated the applicant had an inability to adapt to military life. 7. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the separation notification in accordance with chapter 11 of AR 635-200. He consulted with counsel. He was advised by his commander of the basis for the contemplated action to separate him for entry level performance, the effects of this separation, the rights available to him, and the effects of any action taken by him in waiving his rights. He acknowledged he understood if the request for discharge were approved, he would receive an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service. He further elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf. 8. On 26 February 1991, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation that indicates. a. His behavior was normal, he was fully alert, fully oriented, his mood or affect was unremarkable, his thought content was normal, and his memory was good. b. In this psychiatrist’s opinion, he had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings [deemed appropriate by his chain of command]. c. The psychiatrist also determined the applicant was having significant adjustment problems in the Army manifested by frequent visits to the medical facility, uneven work performance, continual complaints of depression and anxiety as well as worry about family difficulties. His clinical interview and psychological testing suggested his adjustment was unlikely to significantly improve in a military environment. It was strongly recommended that he be separated from the military for the good of the Soldier as well as the military. 9. On 28 February 1991, the immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with chapter 11 of AR 635-200. 10. On 5 March 1991, the separation authority waived the rehabilitation requirements and approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 11, AR 635-200, and directed the applicant’s service be uncharacterized. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 8 March 1991, from his unit at Fort Lee. 11. His DD Form 214 confirms he was discharged in pay grade E-1, his effective date of pay grade is 18 September 1990. He completed 5 months and 21 days of creditable active military service. He completed no foreign service. The DD Form 214 also shows in: * Character of Service, “Uncharacterized” * Separation Authority, Chapter 11, Paragraph 11-3a, AR 635-200 * Narrative Reason for Separation, “Entry Level Status” 12. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. AR 635-200 states a separation under Chapter 11 applied to Soldiers who were in an entry-level status (i.e., had completed no more than 180 days of continuous active duty before the date of the initiation of separation action) who could not meet the minimum standards for completion of training. An uncharacterized description of service was required for separation under this chapter. b. The applicant is advised an uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier’s military service. It merely means the Soldier had not been in the Army long enough for his character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. 13. The applicant provides medical documents showing between October 1990 and January 1991, he was evaluated many times for various foot problems that included pes planus, tenderness, ankle pain, foot pain (numerous times), vomiting/headaches, pain in arches (both feet), and “bilat” foot pain, he provides an Individual Sick Slip showing he had a routine consult with a foot doctor, on January 1991, and an enlistment Medical Examination/Medical History showing he was qualified for enlistment. 14. The applicant contends he completed basic training as well as the Petroleum Supply Specialist Course. He completed his training obligations to the Army and he was advanced to paygrade E-2. However, there is no evidence he was ever advanced to pay grade E-2. He held pay grade E-1 at the time of discharge, with an effective date of 18 September 1990. Additionally, he contends he had medical issues with his feet and ankles and often reported to the medical staff. He believes this could have been a major reason for his discharge. The available evidence does not support the applicant was discharged due to medical issues. 15. He was discharged due to entry-level performance and conduct in accordance with chapter 11 of AR 635-200 with uncharacterized service. He completed 5 months and 21 days of creditable active military service. The available evidence shows he was unable to adapt to military life. It appears he may have completed the basic training requirements. But he was never assigned to a unit where he actually held the MOS. 16. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant's petition, submissions, contentions, and his service record in light of the published guidance on equity, injustice, or clemency. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicants request, supporting documents and evidence in the records. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his military service record and documents provided by the applicant. The governing regulation provides that a separation will be described as an entry-level separation, with service uncharacterized, if the separation action is initiated while a Soldier is in entry-level status. The applicant did not complete training and was released from active duty due to entry-level performance and conduct. As such, his DD Form 214 properly shows the appropriate narrative reason and his service as uncharacterized. 2. An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier’s military service. It merely means the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. As a result, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING X X X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: Except for the correction addressed in Administrative Note(s) below, the Board found 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. 6/4/2021 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): A review of the applicant’s records shows omitted administrative data not annotated on his DD Form 214 for the period ending 8 March 1991. As a result, amend his DD Form 214 by adding * Item 11 (Primary Specialty) 77F10 Petroleum Supply Specialist 00 Year 01 Month //NOTHING FOLLOWS * Item 14 (Military Education) Petroleum Supply Specialist Course, 9 weeks, 1991 //NOTHING FOLLOWS 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 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Chapter 11 of the regulation in effect at the time provided for the separation of personnel due to unsatisfactory performance or conduct, or both, while in anentry-level status. This provision applied to individuals who had demonstrated they were not qualified for retention because they: * could not adapt socially or emotionally to military life * lacked the aptitude, ability, motivation, or self-discipline for military service * demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service b. The separation policy applied to Soldiers who could not meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of a lack of aptitude, ability, motivation, or self-discipline. Separation under this chapter applied to Soldiers who were in an entry-level status (i.e., had completed no more than 180 days of continuous active service before the date of the initiation of separation action). An uncharacterized description of service was required for separation under this chapter. c. It states in pertinent part that an uncharacterized separation is an entry-level separation. A separation will be described as an entry-level separation if processing is initiated while a member is in an entry-level status, except when characterization under other than honorable condition is authorized under the reason for separation and is warranted by the circumstances of the case or when The Secretary of the Army, on a case-by-case basis, determines that characterization of service as honorable is clearly warranted by the presence of unusual circumstances involving personal conduct and performance of duty. For Regular Army Soldiers, entry-level status is the first 180 days of continuous active duty or the first 180 days of continuous active duty following a break in service of more than 92 days of active military service. d. 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. e. 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. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier's separation specifically allows such characterization. f. Uncharacterized separations are deemed entry-level status, commanders initiated the action while the Soldier was within the first 180 days of continuous active duty. Soldiers separated in an entry-level status were issued an uncharacterized character of service. On a case-by-case basis, and when clearly warranted due to unusual circumstances involving personal conduct or duty performance, the Secretary of the Army could grant a Soldier an honorable character of service. 3. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court- martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief based on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS//