Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710449
Original file (9710449.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
2. The applicant makes no specific request but states, in effect, that he was denied unemployment benefits because he did not complete a full term of active service.
3. The applicant’s military records show that he was born on 22 September 1969. He completed 12 years of formal education. On 2 March 1993, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years. He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 62E (Heavy Construction Equipment Operator). His highest grade held was E-4. His awards included the Army Achievement Medal (1 st Oak Leaf Cluster), the Good Conduct Medal and the Humanitarian Service Medal. He completed one tour in Korea.

4. On 22 July 1996, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. The only reason for his proposed action was consecutive failures of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The commander recommended he receive an honorable discharge.

5. The applicant consulted with counsel and elected not to submit statements on his own behalf.

6. On 22 July 1996, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the soldier be issued a general discharge.

7. The applicant completed a separation physical and was found qualified for separation.

8. On 31 July 1996, he was discharged, in pay grade E-4, under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13, unsatisfactory performance, with a general discharge. He had completed 3 years, 5 months and 1 day of creditable active service and had no lost time.

9. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member may be separated when it is determined that he or she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory performance. Commanders will separate a soldier for unsatisfactory performance when it is clearly established that, in the commander’s judgment, the soldier will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.

10. The VA and some states, in determining qualifications for benefits administered by their agencies, generally hold that an individual who accepts a discharge prior to completion of his complete term of obligated service may not be eligible for benefits unless or until that agency determines that the early discharge amounted to a complete and unconditional separation from the service.

 CONCLUSIONS:

 1. The applicant’s discharge from service was accomplished in accordance with applicable laws and regulations in effect at the time of his separation and the discharge an appropriate option for the approving authority to direct to be given.

2. However, in the interest of justice, this Board recognizes the applicant’s exemplary service, the fact that the sole reason for discharge was his failure to pass the APFT, the fact that he completed over 3 years of service and the fact that his immediate commander recommended he receive an honorable discharge.

3. It would be fair and equitable to upgrade the applicant’s general discharge to an honorable discharge. It would also be fair and equitable to consider this discharge as having been issued as a complete and unconditional separation.

4. The circumstances of the applicant’s discharge on 31 July 1996 have worked an injustice upon him by depriving him of consideration for certain VA and other state/federal benefits for his period of service.

5. However, unemployment benefits are a matter of state law. Any corrections this Board may make may or may not have any effect where unemployment benefits are concerned.

6. In view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

 RECOMMENDATION :

1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was given an honorable discharge from the Army on 31 July 1996, under the provisions of Chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200. Also, that the applicant was eligible for a complete and unconditional separation from the military service at this time.

2. That the individual concerned be issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate from the Army of the United States, dated 31 July 1996, denoting an honorable discharge in lieu of the general discharge now held by him.

3. That the individual concerned be issued a new DD Form 214 reflecting the aforementioned corrections.

 BOARD VOTE :
GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

 GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
                                                      CHAIRPERSON
                                                      

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710449C070209

    Original file (9710449C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    The VA and some states, in determining qualifications for benefits administered by their agencies, generally hold that an individual who accepts a discharge prior to completion of his complete term of obligated service may not be eligible for benefits unless or until that agency determines that the early discharge amounted to a complete and unconditional separation from the service. The applicant’s discharge from service was accomplished in accordance with applicable laws and regulations in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029484

    Original file (20100029484.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge and change of his "unsatisfactory performance" narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). On 21 December 1992, the applicant's unit commander recommended his separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was separated for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000370C070206

    Original file (20050000370C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He further states his discharge from the Army for unsatisfactory performance was not deserved, and now requests he be given a medical discharge for his flat feet and the torn ligament in his knee, or that his records be corrected to show he completed his enlistment and was separated by reason of ETS. The APFT scorecard shows he completed 42 pushups, 65 sit-ups, and the 6.2 miles alternate bicycle event in 37 minutes and 30 seconds, which again resulted in a failure of his APFT. Therefore,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005732

    Original file (20140005732.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Had a medical review been conducted this condition would have resulted in a permanent medical retirement instead of a discharge for unsatisfactory performance. On 2 October 1996, the applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action against him for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200. At the time of the applicant's discharge, there is no evidence of an unfitting condition.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019706

    Original file (20110019706.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Chapter 13 provides for the separation of a Soldier when it is determined that he/she is unqualified for further military service because of unsatisfactory performance. The applicant's records show he was discharged for failing to pass two...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002674

    Original file (20130002674.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his general discharge and change of item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) from unsatisfactory performance to something more favorable. Accordingly, the ADRB voted to grant relief by upgrading his general discharge to an honorable discharge. The evidence of record confirms the narrative reason for separation was assigned based on the fact that he was discharged under the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000927

    Original file (20150000927.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 September 1996, the applicant was separated with a general discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 13. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The evidence of record clearly shows that failure to pass the APFT was not the only reason the applicant was discharged.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130006503

    Original file (AR20130006503.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant was discharged for the sole reason of failing to meet the minimum standards of the APFT; his service record does not contain any other derogatory information, and he earned the rank of SPC/E-4 while serving 2 years, 11 months, and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006448

    Original file (20110006448.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 24 September 1991 under the provisions of Army regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance. On 17 October 1996, after reviewing all of the available evidence in his case, the ADRB determined that his discharge was both proper and equitable under the circumstances and voted unanimously to deny his request for an upgrade...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004624

    Original file (20110004624.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). At the time of the applicant's separation, the SPD code JHJ was the appropriate SPD code for Soldiers separated for unsatisfactory performance under the provisions of chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200. His RE code was assigned based on his discharge under the provisions of chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200 due to his unsatisfactory performance.