BOARD DATE: 8 May 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130016014
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests correction of her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show her overseas service in Kuwait. She also requests that the characterization of her service be upgraded to honorable.
2. The applicant states she deployed to Kuwait in 2003. Her DD Form 214 does not reflect this deployment. She needs this correction to assist with her application for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits. She contends that her commander gave her an honorable characterization of service. However, her DD Form 214 shows general, under honorable conditions and she wants it corrected so she can receive education benefits from the VA.
3. The applicant provides no additional documentation.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records (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. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. On 9 April 2002, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. She completed her initial training as a food service specialist.
3. Records at the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) show that the applicant received hostile fire pay, imminent danger pay, and combat zone tax exclusion from 11 April through 30 June 2003 (2 months and 20 days) for service in Kuwait.
4. On 22 October 2004, the applicant was discharged. However, her discharge packet is missing from her military records. Her DD Form 214 shows:
a. she was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 8, due to pregnancy;
b. her service was characterized as under honorable conditions, general;
c. she completed 2 years, 6 months, and 14 days of creditable active duty service;
d. her foreign service is blank; and
e. her remarks block does not contain the dates of her deployment.
5. On or about 23 August 2006, the applicant requested an upgrade of her discharge. She based her request on needing to receive VA education benefits. The only supporting document she provided was her DD Form 214. She offered no explanation or argument concerning the characterization of service. The Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) considered her case on 11 January 2008. The ADRB determined that her discharge was proper and equitable and denied her request based on the following findings and comments:
a. The specific facts and circumstances leading to her discharge were not contained in the available records.
b. The legal basis for her separation was Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 8 which provided for the voluntary separation of enlisted women because of pregnancy.
c. There were no apparent mitigating factors that would warrant the upgrade of her characterization.
d. The DD Form 214 showed a separation code of KDF for pregnancy, and lacking evidence to the contrary, the ADRB presumed Government regularity in the processing of her discharge.
6. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) provides detailed instructions for completing separation documents, including the DD Form 214. It provides that Item 18 (Remarks) will contain the following entry for Regular Army Soldiers: "SERVICE IN (NAME OF COUNTRY DEPLOYED) FROM (inclusive dates for example, YYYYMMDD - YYYYMMDD)."
7. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR)), paragraph 2-9 requires that the Board 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.
8. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations):
a. Chapter 8 of this regulation establishes policy and procedures and provides authority for voluntary separation of enlisted women because of pregnancy. This chapter applies to all Active Army enlisted women.
b. Service will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions per chapter 3, section II.
c. Prior to characterization as under honorable conditions, the Soldier will be advised of the specific factors in the service record that warrant such a characterization.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant contends that her DD Form 214 should be corrected to show her overseas service in Kuwait and that the characterization of her service should be upgraded to honorable.
2. DFAS records show that the applicant received hostile fire and imminent danger pay from 11 April through 30 June 2003 (2 months and 20 days) for service in Kuwait. Therefore, her DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this deployment.
3. In view of the above, the applicant's DD Form 214 should be corrected:
a. to show her foreign service as 2 months and 20 days; and
b. to add the remark: "SERVICE IN KUWAIT: 20030411 - 20030630."
4. The available records do not contain any evidence showing why the commander elected to give her an under honorable conditions characterization of service. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any substantiating evidence or convincing argument to support her contention that her discharge was in error or unjust.
5. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.
6. The applicant's desire to obtain VA educational benefits is not a valid justification to upgrade her discharge.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
___X_____ ____X____ __X___ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:
a. showing she completed 2 months and 20 days of foreign service; and
b. adding the remark: "SERVICE IN KUWAIT: 20030411 -200306030."
2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented was insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to upgrading the applicant's characterization of service to honorable.
_______ _X _______ ___
CHAIRPERSON
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.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130016014
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130016014
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080003784
The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, and indicated that this was a standard pregnancy separation with no extenuating circumstances or pertinent issues. Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 8, paragraph 8-3b, states that prior to characterization of service as under honorable conditions, the Soldier will be advised of the specific factors in the service record that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090018022
The version of this regulation in effect at the time directs that the service members "blood group" from the Immunization Record or the DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) will be entered in item 30 of the DD Form 214. The regulation applicable at the time directed that only the members blood group would be recorded in item 30 of the DD Form 214, not the Rh factor (negative or positive). The evidence of record shows the applicant was found to be pregnant in June 1970.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001417
The applicant requests that the reentry eligibility (RE) code on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed from a 3 to a 1. b. a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 11 April 2012, wherein she requested voluntary separation in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 8, for pregnancy. d. Army Regulation 635-200 further states that prior to discharge or release from active duty individuals...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002941
The applicant requests to change the narrative reason for her separation from "Pregnancy Discharge - Overseas Separation" to "Hardship." The complete facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's separation were not available to the Board; however, the applicant's record contains Orders 118-6, issued by the 369th Personnel Service Company, dated 8 June 1988, which show she received an approved overseas separation and an approved chapter 8 (Separation of Enlisted Women for Pregnancy)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012976
She was advised of her right to remain in the service or to request separation in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200. On 10 July 1989, the applicant personally signed a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) requesting an immediate separation from the Regular Army under the provisions of chapter 8, Army Regulation 635-200. c. Army Regulation 635-200 states that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes based on their service records or the reason...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000203
The medical records that the applicant provided show that she had an abortion in early August 1970 at 3 months of gestation. Accordingly, on 9 October 1970, she was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 8 due to pregnancy and assigned SPN 221 based on her reason and authority for discharge. The regulation in effect at the time provided for the separation of enlisted women for pregnancy who were at the time or had been pregnant during their current...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016987
On 16 May 1983, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of chapter 8 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of pregnancy and directed her service be characterized as honorable. Her DD Form 214 confirms she was discharged under the provisions of chapter 8 of Army Regulation 635-200 with a narrative reason of separation as "pregnancy" and a separation code of "MDF." Furthermore, there is no evidence the applicant voluntarily requested separation for hardship.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019309
Accordingly, she was discharged on 19 April 1963 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-210 for pregnancy with a General Discharge Certificate. Army Regulation 635-210 (Discharge of Enlisted Personnel, Marriage, Pregnancy, or Parenthood) in effect at the time provided, in pertinent part, that an honorable or general discharge would be issued based on an overall review of the individuals service records and a recommendation from the commander. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to...
ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002066871
Prior review(s): NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority: GERARD W. SCHWARTZ Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: EARNEST C. SMITH, JR. Lieutenant...
ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003095023
On 12 July 1996, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, AR 635-200, by reason of pregnancy with a characterization of service of honorable. Type requested: ( X ) Records review ( ) Hearing The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.