Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9611230C070209
Original file (9611230C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
2.  The applicant requests that the term “unsatisfactory performance” be removed from item 28 (narrative reason for separation) of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge.

3.  She states that she served over 42 months in the Army and was honorably discharged.  She attained pay grade E-4, never had any disciplinary action taken against her and gave 100 percent to every task assigned to her.  Her only mistake was that she failed the physical fitness test.  She believes that she was a good soldier and that the term unsatisfactory performance is unfair and harsh.

4.  The applicant's military records show she enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 3 January 1991 and was honorably released from active duty on 21 July 1994 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance.

5.  On 20 June 1994 the applicant’s unit commander advised her that he was initiating action to separate her from the service for unsatisfactory performance.  The specific reasons for the proposed action was that on three occasions, she had failed to achieve a passing score on her semi-annual Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT).  The commander also recommended that rehabilitative efforts be waived and the applicant be immediately discharged with an honorable discharge.

6.  Thereafter, the applicant consulted with counsel and acknowledged receipt of the notification of proposed separation.

7.  The discharge authority waived the rehabilitative transfer requirement and approved the applicant’s separation.  He directed that an Honorable Discharge Certificate be issued.

8.  At the time of discharge she had completed 3 years, 6 months and 19 days of active duty, much of which was documented in her records as outstanding service.

9.  On 24 December 1996 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request to change her discharge.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.

11.  The same regulation, in paragraph 5-3, provides for the separation of soldiers for the convenience of the Government under Secretarial Authority when it is determination that separation would be in the best interest of the Army.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Separation from the service for failure to achieve a passing score on the APFT may properly be the basis for describing a separation as unsatisfactory performance in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13.

2.  However, unsatisfactory performance in this case, although technically correct, appears to be unduly harsh in describing an otherwise outstanding soldier’s service.  Such a description not only does an injustice to the individual but fails the fair and equitable standard expected in the Army’s separation program.

3.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:  

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected:

	a.  by showing that the individual concerned was released from active duty under authority of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-3;

	b.  by showing the narrative reason for separation as Secretarial Authority; and

	c.  by showing the separation code as LFF.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




						________________________
							CHAIRPERSON

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012523

    Original file (20140012523.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of the character of service reflected on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) from "uncharacterized" to either "honorable" or "under honorable conditions." On 16 December 1997, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The evidence of record shows the applicant failed to achieve the minimum standards and as a result, she was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 11, for entry-level status...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008558

    Original file (20140008558.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to change his character of service from uncharacterized to honorable. His record contains a DA Form 705 that shows he took a Diagnostic APFT on four occasions during AIT. His record contains four DA Forms 4856 (General Counseling Form) that show he was counseled for failing the diagnostic APFT for the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, time.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199711263C070209

    Original file (199711263C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any) APPLICANT REQUESTS: In essence, that her entry level performance and conduct discharge from active duty on 10 April 1995 be changed to a medical discharge. The applicant's records do not contain any evidence, and she has not provided any probative medical evidence to show that she had a medical condition, which...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120011872

    Original file (20120011872.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 October 1987, her immediate commander initiated separation action against her in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of unsatisfactory performance with an honorable discharge. On 16 November 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of unsatisfactory performance with her service characterized as honorable. The available evidence shows the applicant was unable to pass the APFT during training.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199711263

    Original file (199711263.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. She was administered medication and given a profile that stated no physical training. The applicant's records do not contain any evidence, and she has not provided any probative medical evidence to show that she had a medical condition, which would have rendered her medically unable to pass her APFT.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015723

    Original file (20100015723.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence in the available records to show that she applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of her discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. Chapter 13 states in pertinent part that initiation of separation proceedings is required for Soldiers without medical limitations who have two consecutive failures of the Army Physical Fitness Test, unless the responsible commander chooses to impose a bar to reenlistment per Army Regulation 601-280...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003084C070205

    Original file (20060003084C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    She maintains that the DD Form 2173, (Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status) verified her injury; however, no one in the command took the time to correct the narrative summary listed on her DD Form 214. As a result, she was separated from the Army for failure to pass the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by their military records.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130008395

    Original file (AR20130008395.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 October 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20130008395 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the characterization of service was too harsh based on the record confirms that the applicant was discharged for the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130005464

    Original file (20130005464.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her DD Form 214 shows she was discharged in accordance with (IAW) Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 11 (Entry Level Performance and Conduct). She understood that if she had less than 6 years of total active and Reserve military service at the time of her separation IAW Regulation 635-200, that she would not be entitled to have her case considered by an administrative separation board. Unfortunately, her record does not contain, nor has she...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065188C070421

    Original file (2001065188C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of physical disability. The Board acknowledges that on 27 March 2001 the applicant’s physical therapist indicated he would recommend a medical board.