ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 June 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170009726 APPLICANT REQUESTS: an upgrade of her under honorable conditions discharge to honorable APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) 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 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 she was discriminated by her commander for being a female and feels the Army was not anxious for women to serve. Her commander requested that she write a letter asking for a discharge. She believes she was harassed daily and discriminated against from her entire leadership team. 3. A review of the applicant’s service record shows: a. She enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 November 1981. b. On 21 October 1982, she was counseled by the Chaplain concerning her adjustment to life in the Army. The Chaplain recommended, it would be in the best interest of the Army and the individual, if she were separated from the Army under provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200. c. On 7 January 1983, the immediate commander notified her of his intent to initiate separation action against her in accordance with Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations- Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance, He cited the specific reasons was her inability to adapt socially and emotionally to the service. d. On 25 January 1983, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's intent to separate her and subsequently consulted with legal counsel. She was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation for unsatisfactory performance, the type of discharge she could receive and its effect on further enlistment or reenlistment, the possible effects of this discharge, and of the procedures/rights that were available to her. She further indicated that she understood: * She could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge under honorable conditions was issued to him * She could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under Federal and State laws as a result of the issuance of an under other than honorable conditions discharge e. Her immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with chapter 13 of AR 635-200 for unsatisfactory performance. f. On 8 February 1983, the separation authority approved the discharge under the provisions of chapter 13 of AR 635-200 by reason of unsatisfactory performance and directed her service be characterized as under honorable conditions (general). On 8 February 1983, she was accordingly discharged. g. The DD Form 214 she was issued confirms she was discharged under the provisions of chapter 13 of AR 635-200 by reason of unsatisfactory performance in the rank/grade of Private First Class/E-3, with a character of service of under honorable conditions. It also shows: * she completed a total of 1year, 2 months and 29 days of active service * she was awarded or authorized the Army Service Ribbon, Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar 4. By regulation, commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. 5. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and his service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to grant relief. The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. The Board applied Department of Defense standards of liberal consideration to the complete evidentiary record and did not find any evidence of error, injustice, or inequity. She did not provide character witness statements or evidence of post-service achievements for the Board to consider. Based upon the record, the Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization was warranted as a result of her performance. 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: 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): Not Applicable 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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (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 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. 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. 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. 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. 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// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170009726 4 1