ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 April 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170018332 APPLICANT REQUESTS: an upgrade of her uncharacterized discharge. 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 that she would like an upgrade of her uncharacterized discharge to honorable. She had a child and her recruiter convinced her that she had to marry in order for her to be eligible to join the military. She married and then enlisted in the service. While in boot camp, her husband was arrested. She was told if she did not come to get her child, that the child would be placed in foster care. She then reached out to the Red Cross who subsequently worked with her family and she was able to separate. She did not voluntarily separate or even wanted to get out of the Army but the well-being of her family took precedence. She would like for the Board to review her records and adjust her narrative for separation and her character of discharge to honorable. 3. A review of the applicant’s service records show the following: a. She enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 March 1983. b. She received several counseling statements in regards to being overweight. c. On 29 March 1983, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against her in accordance with chapter 11 of a. Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separation), for failure to meet height and weight standards. d. On 30 March 1983, she acknowledged the separation action from the commander. She acknowledged her understanding that if the discharge action were approved, she would receive an entry level separation with uncharacterized service. She further made the following elections: * she did not desire to consult with counsel * she did not desire to make statements on her own behalf * she did not desire to obtain copies of documents that will be sent to the separation authority supporting the proposed separation * she did not request a separation physical e. Subsequent to this acknowledgement, her immediate commander initiated separation action against her. He stated that further active service would: * create serious disciplinary problems or a hazard to the military mission or to the member * be inappropriate because the member is obviously resisting all rehabilitation attempts or that rehabilitation would not produce the quality Soldier desired by the Army f. On 31 March 1983, the separation authority approved the discharge action and ordered the applicant separated with an entry level separation. g. The applicant was discharged from active duty on 4 April 1983 under the provisions of chapter 11 of AR 635-200. Her DD Form 214 shows she received an uncharacterized discharge due to entry level status performance and conduct. She completed 2 months and 11 days of active service. 4. By regulation (AR 635-200), the Army considers a separation an entry-level separation if processing is initiated while a member is in an entry-level status. During the first 180 days of continuous active military service, a member's service is under review. a. When separated within the first 180 days, service is usually not characterized unless the circumstances of the separation warrant an under other-than-honorable conditions discharge. A general discharge is not authorized. b. The entry-level separation is given regardless of the reason for separation. An uncharacterized discharge is neither positive nor negative; it is not "derogatory." An uncharacterized character of service is not meant to be a negative reflection of a a. Soldier’s military service. It merely means that the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. 5. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicants’ petition in her service record in accordance with published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, to include the DoD guidance on liberal consideration when reviewing discharge upgrade requests, the Board determined that relief was not warranted. Based upon the applicant’s discharge being initiated within the first 180 days of active federal service, the Board concluded that the characterization of service received at the time of service was appropriate. For that reason, the Board recommended denying the applicant’s request for relief. 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. 5/7/2019 X CHAIRPERSON Signed by: 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 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 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a (Honorable discharge) states an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’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. b. Paragraph 3-7b (General discharge) states 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. c. Paragraph 11-1 states this chapter sets policy and provides guidance for the separation of personnel because of unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) while in entry level status. d. Paragraph 11-3 this policy applies to Soldiers who have completed no more than 180 days active duty on current enlistment by the date of separation. Soldiers who cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline. 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 1. 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.