APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his discharge for unsatisfactory performance be corrected to a medical retirement.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was using an asthma inhaler when he failed the run portion of his Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military personnel and medical records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 January 1986, was awarded the military occupational specialty of Bradley Fighting Vehicle System Mechanic Recovery Operations, served continuously, and was promoted to pay grade E-5.

On 17 May 1994 the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his separation for unsatisfactory performance and of his rights in conjunction with that recommendation.  The basis for his recommendation was his twice failing the APFT and his failure to comply with the Army Weight Control Program (AWCP) standards.  The applicant waived all of his rights except his right to legal counsel.

The applicant’s commander then forwarded his recommendation to discharge the applicant to the approving authority.  Documentation attached to that recommendation showed that the applicant had failed a record APFT, was given remedial training and passed a diagnostic APFT, but again failed a record APFT, failing the maximum allowable time for the run by 57 seconds.  The documentation also showed that the applicant was given a body fat content test on 16 April 1994 and was determined to exceed his allowable weight by 35 pounds, thereby exceeding the body fat standards by 1.55 percent (the applicant is 72 inches tall and weighed 235 pounds).

On 18 April 1994 the applicant was given a physical examination.  In that examination it was noted that he was not taking any medications and did not have any physical profile limitations.  On the portion of the physical that is completed by the individual being examined, the applicant himself marked that he did not have asthma or shortness of breath.  That examination determined that the applicant was medically qualified for separation with no physical profile limitations at all.

Accordingly, on 6 June 1994 the applicant was issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate for unsatisfactory performance.  He had 8 years, 4 months and 10 days of active service and had been awarded the Army Commendation Medal and three awards of the Army Achievement Medal.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the policy and prescribes the procedures for administrative separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 applies to separation for unsatisfactory performance.  This chapter provides for the separation of individuals who, in the commander’s judgment, will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.  When separation for unsatisfactory performance was warranted an honorable or general discharge was issued as determined by the separation authority based upon the individual's entire record.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  There is absolutely no evidence that the applicant had a medical condition which would have warranted his processing through medical channels.

2.  Lacking medical evidence which would warrant giving the applicant an alternate event for the run on his APFT, he was required to complete the run in a specified period of time.  He failed to do so twice, despite remedial training.

3.  Therefore, his separation due to unsatisfactory performance was appropriate.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director