ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:

	BOARD DATE:  26 July 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20190007090


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty), for the period ending 12 March 1998, 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 30 April 2019
*	DD Form 214, for the period ending 12 March 1998
*	State of Georgia Driver's License, issued on 21 July 2016

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 when she entered the Army she was pregnant and she 
remained pregnant throughout basic training.  She was informed that if she miscarried 
the baby, she would be allowed in remain in the Army.  Her uncharacterized discharge 
is currently equivalent to a dishonorable discharge in the eyes of some reviewers; 
however, she was told her uncharacterized discharge would be equal to an honorable 
discharge and at the young age of 20, she believed what she was told.  Now she 
recognizes that what she was told is not true and the fact that she did not register as 
pregnant before she entered the Army is something that was not in her control.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 February 1998. 

4.  The applicant's record contained a DA Form 3349 (Physical Profile), dated 3 March 
1998, which shows she had an intrauterine pregnancy with a probably date of 
conception of 20 February 1998.  The DA Form 3349 notes the pregnancy existed prior 
to service and she was being returned to her unit for separation processing in 
accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted 
Personnel), paragraph 5-11b, for failure to meet procurement medical standards.  The 
DA Form 3349 also notes that she was to be discharged expeditiously due to the need 
for early prenatal care.

5.  The applicant was formally counseled on 5 March 1998.  Her DA Form 4856 
(General Counseling Form) shows she was told she would be discharged from the 
service due to her pregnancy.  She was counseled on her need for a waiver to reenter 
the service, as well as the Army's standards for sole parenthood.  Her physical profile 
was also explained to her.

6.  The applicant was recommended for discharge on 6 March 1998, under the 
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11b, due to pregnancy.

7.  The separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 6 March 
1998 and he directed that her service be uncharacterized.

8.  The applicant was discharged on 12 March 1998, under the provisions of Army 
Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-11b, due to her failure to meet procurement medical 
fitness standards.  She completed 19 days of net active service this period.  Her  
DD Form 214 confirms her service was uncharacterized.  

9.  Army Regulation 635-200, in affect at that 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 enlisted members for a variety of reasons.

10.  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.  As a result, her service was 
appropriately described as "uncharacterized" for this period of active service, in 
accordance with governing regulations.  

11.  An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier’s 
military service.  It simply means the Soldier was not in the Army long enough for his or 
her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise.  

BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, 
evidence in the records and published DoD guidance for consideration of discharge 
upgrade requests.  The Board considered the applicant’s statement, the length of her 
service and the reason for her discharge.  The Board also considered the applicant’s 
entry level status at the time of her separation and determined that the character of 
service she received was not in error or unjust. 

2.    After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found relief 
was not warranted.  

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 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.  Paragraph 3-7a states 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.

   b.  Paragraph 5-11, in effect at the time, provided that Soldiers who were not medically 
qualified under procurement medical fitness standards when accepted for enlistment or 
who became medically disqualified under these standards prior to entrance on active duty 
or active duty training or initial entry training will be separated.  A medical proceeding, 
regardless of the date completed, must establish that a medical condition was identified by 
appropriate medical authority within six months of the Soldier’s initial entrance on active 
duty, that the condition would have permanently or temporarily disqualified the Soldier for 
entry into the military service had it been detected at that time, and the medical condition 
does not disqualify the Soldier from retention in the service under the provisions of Army 
Regulation 40-501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 3.  The characterization of 
service for Soldiers separated under this provision of regulation will normally be honorable, 
but will be uncharacterized if the Soldier is in an entry level status.  Entry level status 
applied to Soldier who, before the date of the initiation of separation action, completed no 
more than 180 days of continuous active duty and demonstrated that they could not or 
would not adapt socially or emotionally to military life.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20190007090

4

1