IN THE CASE OF:  
 
  BOARD DATE: 18 July 2023 
 
  DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230001141 
 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS: reconsideration of her previous request to upgrade her characterization of service from uncharacterized to honorable. 
 
APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 
DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), 30 September 2022. 
 
FACTS: 
 
1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20190002547 on 5 November 2019. 
 
2.  The applicant states she was told her discharge would be honorable due to the enlargement of her heart while she was in basic training. 
 
3.  On 16 August 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. She did not complete initial entry training and was not awarded a military occupational specialty.  
 
4.  The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's discharge are not available for review. However, her DD Form 214 shows the applicant was discharged from active duty on 12 December 2000 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), Chapter 11, due to entry level performance and conduct, with the issuance of an Uncharacterized Certificate. Her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows: 
 
 a.  She completed 3 months and 27 days of net active service this period. 
 
 b.  The Separation Code is “JGA”, and Re-entry Code is “3”. 
 
5.  On 21 April 2020, the Board denied her request for an upgrade of her discharge. The Board reviewed the available service records and the applicant’s statement and determined there is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation for relief. 
 
6.  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 still in an entry-level status at the time of her separation. As a result, her service was appropriately described as "uncharacterized," in accordance with governing regulations. 
 
7.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 11 of that regulation states, in pertinent part, that a member will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial, after completion of appellate review and after such affirmed sentence has been ordered duly executed. 
 
8.  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. 
 
9. MEDICAL REVIEW: 
 
    a.  The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor was asked to review this case. Documentation reviewed included the applicant’s ABCMR application and accompanying documentation, the applicant’s previous ABCMR denial, the military electronic medical record (AHLTA), the VA electronic medical record (JLV), the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB), the Medical Electronic Data Care History and Readiness Tracking (MEDCHART) application, and/or the Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS).  The ARBA Medical Advisor made the following findings and recommendations:   
    b.  The applicant is applying to the ABCMR requesting an upgrade of her 12 December 2000 uncharacterized discharge, and in essence, a referral to the Disability Evaluation System (DES).  She states: 
“Should be honorable.  I was told my discharge will be honorable due to my heart had enlarge while I was in bootcamp.” 
    c.  The Record of Proceedings details the applicant’s military service and the circumstances of the case.  The applicant’s DD 214 for the period of service under consideration shows she entered the Regular Army on 16 August 2000 and received an uncharacterized discharge on 12 December 2000 under provisions provided in chapter 11 of AR 635-200, Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel (26 June 1996), for falling below entry level performance and conduct standards.    
    d.  This request was previously denied by the ABCMR on 5 November 2019 (AR20190002547).  Rather than repeat their findings here, the board is referred to the 
record of proceedings for that case.  This review will concentrate on the new evidence submitted by the applicant. 
    e.  No medical documentation was submitted with the application.  There are no clinical encounters in AHTLA or JLV. 
    f.  Neither his separation packet nor documentation addressing his separation was submitted with the application or uploaded into iPERMS. 
    g.  An uncharacterized discharge is given to individuals on active duty who separate prior to completing 180 days of military service, or when the discharge action was initiated prior to 180 days of service.  For the reserve components, it also includes discharges prior to completing initial entry training (IET).  There are two phases - Basic Combat Training (BCT) and Advanced Individual Training (AIT).  This type of discharge does not characterize service as good or bad.   
    h.  It is the opinion of the Agency Medical Advisor that a discharge upgrade remains unwarranted. 
 
BOARD DISCUSSION: 
 
After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, the military record, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged during initial entry training for entry level performance and conduct. She did not complete initial entry training and was not awarded an MOS. The governing regulation provides that a separation will be described as an entry-level separation, with service uncharacterized, if the separation action is initiated while a Soldier is in entry-level status. An uncharacterized discharge is given to individuals who separate prior to completing 180 days of military service, or when the discharge action was initiated prior to 180 days of service. Additionally, the Board reviewed and was persuaded by the medical official’s finding no evidence the applicant had any medical which contributed to or been the cause of the misconduct which led to the administrative separation; or any duty incurred medical condition which would have failed the medical retention standards of chapter 3 of AR 40-501, Standards of Medical Fitness, prior to her discharge. 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. 
  
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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20190002547 on 5 November 2019. 
 
  7/18/2023

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.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 11 provided that an enlisted person will be given a BCD pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or SPCM after completion of the appellate review and after such affirmed sentence has been ordered duly executed. 
 
 a.  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.  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. Chapter 11 of this 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. 
 
2.  This provision of regulation applied to individuals who had demonstrated that they were not qualified for retention because they could not adapt socially or emotionally to military life, or because they lacked the aptitude, ability, motivation, or self-discipline for military service, or they had demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service. 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. The regulation required an uncharacterized description of service for separation under this chapter. 
 
3.  Separation under Chapter 11 applied to Soldiers who were in an entry level status and, 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. 
 
4.  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 on the basis of 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//