IN THE CASE OF: 

		BOARD DATE:	  27 May 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130017135 


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 an upgrade of her uncharacterized service to honorable service.  She also requests recalculation of her service data.  

2.  She states:

* her records contain several errors that she has tried to get corrected
* she served (in the military) from 28 June 1989 to 12 November 1991
* her records show she was in an entry level status when she separated, but she was not
* her records show she had no active service or less than 90 consecutive days of active duty training
* she was in basic holdover and the count was over 90 days 
* after she completed basic training, she reported to her station during the required weekends as well as her assigned active duty unit

3.  She provides:

* Letter from the Army Discharge Review Board
* DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States)
* Discharge orders
* DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II)
* Chronological Statement of Retirement Points
* Army Reserve Retirement Credit Card
* Letter addressed to the National Personnel Records Center and response letters
* Department of Veterans Affairs Facilities Locator and Directory
* Photographs
* Handwritten notes

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.  The applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 28 June 1989 under the alternate training program for training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 91C (Practical Nurse).

3.  Her service record contains the following orders which show:

	a.  Orders Number 130-007, dated 28 June 1989, ordered her to initial active duty for training effective 7 July 1989 for approximately 10 weeks or completion of basic "initial" training at Fort Dix, NJ.

   b.  Order Number 139-032, dated 21 July 1989, relieved her from the 42nd Adjutant General Battalion, Fort Dix, NJ (Reception) Station and she was attached to Company D, 4th Battalion, 39th Infantry, 5th Brigade, Fort Dix, NJ effective 21 July 1989, for 12 weeks of basic combat training.  
   
   c.  Orders Number 242-503, dated 30 August 1989, released her from active duty for training (Company D, 4th Battalion, 39th Infantry, Fort Dix, NJ), effective 14 September 1989, and returned her to her unit of assignment.
   
   d.  Orders Number 256-501, dated 13 September 1989, amended Orders Number 242-503, dated 30 August 1989, to show "Soldier Split Option Non Bt (basic training) Grad (graduate)."

4.  Her service record contains a letter, dated 13 September 1989, which indicates she entered active duty on 7 July 1989 and her tour of duty was terminated on 14 September 1989 (a period of 2 months and 7 days).  This letter indicates the applicant had not completed basic training and this letter was issued in lieu of a DD Form 220 (Active Duty Report).

5.  On 23 September 1991, she elected to be separated by reason of pregnancy under Army Regulation 135-175 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve Separation of Officers), paragraph 4-11 and Army Regulation 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve Enlisted Administrative Separations), paragraph 4-9b.

6.  Headquarters, Second U.S. Army, Fort Gillem, Forest Park, GA Orders Number 029-001, dated 12 November 1991, discharged the applicant from the USAR, effective 12 November 1991, under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-178.

7.  Army Regulation 135-178 provides that entry-level status is defined as the first 180 days of continuous active service.  Entry-level service will be described as uncharacterized if separation processing is initiated while a Soldier is in an entry-level status.  Upon enlistment, a Soldier qualifies for entry-level status during:

	a.  the first 180 days of continuous active military service; or

	b.  the first 180 days of continuous active service after a service break of more than 92 days of active service; and

	c.  a member of a Reserve Component who is not on active duty or who is serving under a call or order to active duty for 180 days or less begins entry-level status upon enlistment in a Reserve Component.  Entry-level status for such a member of a Reserve Component terminates:

		(1)  180 days after beginning training if the Soldier is ordered to active duty for training for one continuous period of 180 days or more; or

		(2)  90 days after the beginning of the second period of active duty for training if the Soldier is ordered to active duty for training under a program that splits the training into two or more separate periods of active duty.

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations – Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  Paragraph 1-4 states a DD Form 214 will be prepared for all personnel at the time of their retirement, discharge, or release from the Active Army.  Personnel included are members of the Army National Guard and the USAR separated:

	a.  for physical disability under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation), regardless of the period of time served on active duty;

	b.  after completing 90 days or more of continuous active duty for training, full-time training duty, or active duty for operational support; and

	c.  after completing initial active duty training which resulted in the award of an MOS, even though the active duty was less than 90 days.  This includes completion of advanced individual training under the USAR Split Training Program.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the USAR on 28 June 1989.  She was ordered to initial active duty for training on 7 July 1989.  She was released from active duty for training and returned to her unit of assignment on 14 September 1989.  This is a period of 2 months and 7 days (67 days), which is less than 90 consecutive days of active duty training.  

2.  She was issued a letter, dated 13 September 1989, in lieu of a DD Form 220, which confirms she did not complete basic training.  

3.  The evidence of record shows she was discharged from the USAR on
12 November 1991.  Her period of service was uncharacterized.  

4.  She was in an entry-level status at the time of her discharge from the USAR. because she completed fewer than 180 days of active Federal service.  The determination that the applicant's service was "uncharacterized" was in compliance with the Army regulation governing separation of Soldiers while an in an entry-level status.  An uncharacterized discharge is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service.  It merely means the Soldier has not served on active duty long enough for his or her character of service to be rated.

5.  Since she completed less than 180 days of active Federal service, her service is properly characterized as "uncharacterized."  Therefore, there is no basis for granting relief in this case.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  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 that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _______ _  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)                                         AR20130017135



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130017135



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1