IN THE CASE OF: 

BOARD DATE:  29 July 2019

DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20190008043


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  The applicant request his uncharacterized discharge be 
upgraded 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), (19860711)
*	DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), (19830420)

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 he strongly feels that his service was honorable from the date of 
his enlistment until the altercation he had with another Soldier.  The Soldier uttered a 
racial slur and he reacted.  He makes no excuses for his actions however, would like his 
entire record of service be reviewed.

3.  On 9 April 1986, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army as a Private (E-2) for 
three years at the age of 23.

4.  While attending one station unit training (basic/advanced individual training), the 
applicant received eight counseling’s from three different NCOs within his platoon from 
22 April 1986 to 16 May 1986 for: 

*	Failure to meet physical training standards
*	Three instances for Lack of self-discipline
*	Two instances for not following directions
*	Violating unit standard operating procedures (SOP)
*	Lack of motivation
*	Refusal to train
*	Two instances for disrespect to a Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) 

5.  On 27 May 1986, he received non-judicial punishment (NJP) for using disrespectful 
language towards an NCO.  A portion of his punishment was suspended for 60 days to 
be automatically remitted if not vacated before 26 July 1986.  The punishment was 
vacated because the applicant absented himself from his barracks without authority.  

6.  On 9 June 1986, the applicant received a counseling informing him he was being 
recommended for an entry level separation (ELS).  It stated the applicant lacked 
motivation and self-discipline; he demonstrated behavior characteristics not compatible 
for continued service.

7.  On 10 June 1986, the commander formerly counseled the applicant for his failure to 
adapt to the military.  The applicant managed to get involved in an incident with most of 
the cadre members in charge of his platoon at different times because of him being 
cocky.  The applicant expressed, he wanted to be a Soldier, and he would be 
responsible, exercise self-discipline, and be motivated.  The commander gave the 
applicant a rehabilitative transfer to another platoon informing the applicant if he saw 
anymore examples of disrespect, poor motivation, or lack of self-discipline he would 
push for his separation.  The commander also stated the applicant apparently resolved 
differences between him and his fiancé over his pending assignment to Germany.

8.  On 5 July 1986, the commander formerly counseled the applicant again, 
recommending he receive an entry level separation for not being able to adapt socially 
or emotionally to military life.  Although he completed all required training, he failed to 
develop as a team player and adapt to the military environment as well as receiving a 
NJP hearing for assault against another member of his platoon.  

9.  On 7 July 1986, he was notified by his commander that he was initiating action to 
separate him under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, 
(Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) with a service characterization of 
(Entry Level Separation – uncharacterized) specifically because the applicant was 
unwilling and unable to adapt to military life.  The applicant acknowledged being notified 
of the contemplated separation action against him; he was made aware of his available 
rights and did not desire to consult with military or civilian legal counsel or desire a 
separation medical examination.  The applicant elected to make a statement or submit a 
rebuttal in his own behalf however, it is not available.

10.  On 8 July 1986, the applicant's commander recommended approval and stated 
further counseling and rehabilitation efforts would not result in the quality of Soldiers 
desired by the United States Army.  The appropriate authority approved the 
recommendation for discharge of the applicant.    

11.  On 11 July 1986, the applicant was discharged accordingly with a service 
characterization of uncharacterized.  He completed 3 months, and 3 days of net active 
service.

12.  The applicant states he strongly feels that his service was honorable from the date 
of his enlistment until the altercation he had with another Soldier.  The Soldier uttered a 
racial slur and he reacted.  He makes no excuses for his actions.  His records show on 
17 April 1986, he was given an initial entry training (IET) counseling.  It was used by his 
supervisors to obtain information necessary to insure each Soldier was properly cared 
for and managed; positive identification purposes only.  Part of the counseling, asked all 
IET Soldiers to write an autobiography about themselves.  The applicant wrote in 
summary, he was in Reserve Officer Training (ROTC) Corps for three years at the junior 
and senior levels, he loved physical training, he was hard working and self-motivated, 
he wanted to complete college and become one of the best Soldiers in America.  His 
record is void of a copy of the NJP hearing for assault against another member of his 
platoon.

13.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 with separation date 11 July 
1986 showing the separation reason as entry level status performance and conduct; 
another DD Form 214 from the Navy showing a separation date 20 April 1983 showing 
the separation reason as defective enlistment’s and inductions - erroneous enlistments.  

14.  AR 635-200 states 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. 
 
15.  The applicant is advised an uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a 
negative reflection of a Soldier’s military service.  It merely means that the Soldier had 
not been in the Army long enough for his 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 considerations.  The Board considered the applicant’s statement, the record 
and length of his service, the frequency and nature of his misconduct and performance 
issues, and the reason for his separation.  The Board found insufficient evidence of 
mitigating factors to overcome the misconduct/counseling issues and found no evidence 
of post-service achievements or letters of reference in support of clemency.  Based on a 
preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the character of service the 
applicant received upon separation was not in error or unjust. 

2.  After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that 
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 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.  AR 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 an entry-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 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 duty 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 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).  A separation was deemed entry-level status when 
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.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20190008043
6
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	AR20190008043


5