IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 August 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230001086 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * removal of the lost time from her DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 16 December 1968 * credit for an additional 108 days of active service * a personal appearance hearing before the Board via video/telephone APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552). FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code, 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 she should be given credit for the 108 days showing on her DD Form 214 as lost time because she was still an active service member. She was not absent without leave (AWOL) or a deserter from the Women's Army Corps. Her records from the Department of Veterans Affairs clearly state she served in the U.S. Armed Forces from 6 August 1968 through 16 December 1968, which totals 132 days. She was then honorably discharged. She further states: a. At no time was she voluntarily AWOL from her military duty station. She believes the days were taken from her to render her ineligible for compensation if she ever regained her memory of what happened to her while stationed at Fort McClellan, AL, and as an act of reprisal against her. b. Her Department of Veterans Affairs records show she was diagnosed with post- traumatic stress disorder resulting from military sexual trauma.? 3. Her DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract Armed Forces of the United States) shows she enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 6 August 1968. 4. Headquarters, U.S. Women's Army Corps Center, Special Orders Number 155, 8 August 1968, attached her to Company E (Provisional), Women's Army Corps Training Battalion, Fort McClellan, AL, effective 10 August 1968. 5. The Company E (Provisional), Women's Army Corps Training Battalion, Commanding Officer's Inquiry from the acting commander, 14 August 1968, states she was reported missing from her unit on 12 August 1968. No permission had been granted to her by any member of Company E (Provisional) for this absence. She completed just 1 day of training in the unit. She expressed no dissatisfaction with the service during her initial interview. On the day of her unauthorized departure, she had been at emergency sick call for a swollen eye. The acting commander felt she was influenced in her decision to leave by one or two other members of her company who had been AWOL during processing. She departed with another member of her platoon. The other member returned to her unit later that night and reported that they were given a ride by two men who they believed to be sergeants. 6. On 17 August 1968, she accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for being AWOL from 12 August 1968 until 16 August 1968. Her punishment included an oral reprimand and forfeiture of $20.00 pay per month for 1 month. She did not appeal. 7. The Noble Army Hospital memorandum from the examining physician (Notification of Pregnancy), 21 August 1968, certified the applicant was examined by him and found to be approximately 6 weeks pregnant. The examining physician recommended her separation from the service in accordance with Army Regulation 635-210 (Discharge of Enlisted Personnel Marriage, Pregnancy, or Parenthood) (superseded by Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel) effective 15 July 1966). 8. The DA Form 2496 (Disposition Form) from the acting commander, 22 August 1968, requested placement of the applicant in an administrative holding status pending her separation due to pregnancy. 9. The Company E (Provisional), Women's Army Corps Training Battalion, memorandum (Recommendation for Separation under the Provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 from the acting commander, 22 August 1968, recommended her separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, section III (Pregnancy). Her conduct was rated unsatisfactory and her efficiency was rated fair. 10. The DA Form 2496 from the acting commander, 22 August 1968, states the applicant's conduct was rated unsatisfactory because she repeatedly failed to conduct herself in a proper manner. She was AWOL from her unit. She was insubordinate on several occasions. She failed to report for formations and has refused to wear her uniform. She failed to meet the minimum standards of basic training and put forth no effort to improve her performance. 11. The Company E (Provisional), U.S. Women's Army Corps Training Battalion, Commanding Officer's Inquiry from the acting commander, 23 August 1968, states the applicant was reported missing from her unit on 22 August 1968. a. No permission had been granted by any member of her unit for this absence. The applicant had no appointments. She accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for being AWOL. She was pending separation due to pregnancy. b. On the day of her AWOL, the applicant was informed that she would be separated from the service due to her pregnancy. She became very upset because a definite date for discharge could not be promised. There is no information as to the applicant's probable whereabouts. 12. The Company E (Provisional), Women's Army Corps Training Battalion, 1st endorsement from the assistant adjutant (Recommendation for Separation under the Provisions of Army Regulation 635-200), 26 August 1968, recommended approval of the applicant's separation and further recommended issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. 13. The Headquarters, U.S. Army School/Training Center and Fort McClellan, 2nd endorsement from the assistant adjutant, 27 August 1968, approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, section III, chapter 8 (Discharge of Enlisted Women Marriage, Pregnancy, or Parenthood), with issuance of a General Discharge Certificate. 14. The Company E (Provisional), U.S. Women's Army Corps Training Battalion, letter from the commander, 1 September 1968, informed the applicant's mother that she was AWOL since 22 August 1968. 15. The DA Form 188 (Extract Copy of Morning Report), 4 December 1968, shows her duty status was changed from present for duty to AWOL on 22 August 1968 and further changed from AWOL to dropped from the unit rolls on 23 September 1968. 16. The DD Form 616 (Report of Return of Absentee), 5 December 1968, shows she was returned to military control at Fort Sam Houston, TX, on 3 December 1968. 17. The DA Form 2496 from the Commander, Fort Sam Houston Special Processing Detachment, 11 December 1968, states that in the best interest of the Government, charges for AWOL have not and will not be submitted in order to expedite the applicant's discharge. 18. Item 44 (Time Lost under Section 972, Title 10, U.S. Code (Members: Effects of Lost Time) and Subsequent to Normal Date Expiration Term of Service) of her DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows the following periods of lost time: * 12 August 1968 to 15 August 1968 4 days AWOL * 22 August 1968 to 22 September 1968 32 days AWOL * 23 September 1968 to 2 December 1968 71 days Desertion 19. On 16 December 1968, the applicant was honorably discharged. Her DD Form 214 shows in: * item 26a (Non-Pay Periods Time Lost) * 12 August 1968 through 15 August 1968 * 22 August 1968 through 2 December 1968 * item 30 (Remarks) 107 days lost under Title 10, U.S. Code, section 972, from 12 August 1968 through 15 August 1968 and 22 August 1968 through 2 December 1968 BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the applicant's military records, the Board found relief is not warranted. 2. The Board found the applicant s periods of AWOL were, in fact, lost time and were properly documented as such on her DD Form 214. Because lost time is not creditable toward a Soldier s overall length of service, her DD Form 214 also properly shows she completed 24 days of active duty service. The Board determined the evidence in this case does not support removing the entries for lost time or changing the length of service shown on her DD Form 214. ? BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :xx :xx :xx 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. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 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 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army acting through the ABCMR. The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing (sometimes referred to as an evidentiary hearing or an administrative hearing) or request additional evidence or opinions. Applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. 3. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), 15 July 1966, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 8 established policy, set forth procedures, and provided authority for discharge of enlisted women by reason of pregnancy. When it has been determined that an enlisted woman is pregnant or has given birth to a living child during the period of her present enlistment, she will be afforded an opportunity to request discharge under the provisions of this chapter or request waiver for retention on active duty if lawfully married. If the enlisted woman does not request discharge and a waiver for retention on active duty is not granted, she will be discharged at the earliest practicable date. 4. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), 1 February 1967, prescribed the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active duty service or control of the Active Army. It established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. a. The general instructions stated all available records would be used as a basis for preparation of the DD Form 214, including the DA Form 20 and orders. b. The specific instructions for item 26a stated to enter the inclusive dates of non- pay periods/time lost during the preceding 2 years. ? c. The specific instructions for item 30 for enlisted personnel stated if the individual lost any time prior to normal expiration term of service as indicated on the DA Form 20, enter the total number of days lost with inclusive dates. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20230001086 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1