RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          19 January 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050008006


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Wanda L. Waller               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John Infante                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. William Crain                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Gerald Purcell                |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his narrative reason for
separation be changed.

2.  The applicant states he was told at the Fort Worth Outpatient Clinic
that his narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty) needed to be amended to show
“Honorable VA.”  He contends that he is trying to get his benefits through
the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).

3.  The applicant provides no evidence in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 25 September 1987.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 16 May 2005.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant enlisted on 18 October 1985 and trained as a cannon
crewman. Records show the applicant was counseled on 8 June 1987 for
failure to meet weight goals for five consecutive months.  He was also
advised that his failure to make satisfactory progress in the Weight
Control Program during the last seven months was not acceptable to Army
standards and that he would be separated from military service.

4.  On 1 September 1987, the applicant was notified of his pending
separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5,
paragraph 15, for failure to meet Army weight control standards.  The unit
commander cited that the applicant had been given a reasonable opportunity
to comply with and meet the weight reduction goals prescribed for him by
health care personnel and he had failed to meet these goals.

5.  On 1 September 1987, after consulting with counsel, the applicant
elected not to submit a statement on his behalf.
6.  On 9 September 1987, the separation authority approved the
recommendation for separation and directed that the applicant be furnished
an honorable discharge.

7.  Accordingly, the applicant was released from active duty on 25
September 1987 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5,
paragraph
15, for failure to meet Army weight control standards.

8.  Item 24 (Character of Service) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the
entry, “HONORABLE.”  Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on his DD
Form 214 shows the entry, "FAILURE TO MEET BODY FAT STANDARDS”.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation
of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 5-15 of the regulation in effect at the
time specifically provided that Soldiers who failed to meet the body
composition/weight control standard set forth in Army Regulation 600-9
might be separated per this paragraph when such condition was the sole
basis for separation.  Separation action would not be initiated under this
paragraph until the Soldier had been given a reasonable opportunity to
comply with and meet the weight/body fat reduction goals prescribed for him
or her by health care personnel.  The characterization of service for
Soldiers separated under this provision of regulation would be honorable.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant contends that he needs his narrative reason for
separation amended to obtain DVA benefits, a narrative reason for
separation is not changed for the purpose of obtaining DVA benefits.

2.  The narrative reason for separation used in the applicant’s case
appears to be correct.

3.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error now
under consideration on 25 September 1987; therefore, the time for the
applicant to file a request for correction of any error expired on 24
September 1990.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of
limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to
show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to
timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

JI_____  __WC____  __GP____  DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




            ___John Infante_______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050008006                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060119                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.0200                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]