RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  3 January 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070011478 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Ms. Joyce A. Wright

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Ann M. Campbell

Chairperson

Mr. Dean A. Camarella

Member

Mr. Rodney E. Barber

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 item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), be corrected.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he believes the entry in item 28, of his DD Form 214, is incorrect and that he left the service because of base closure or military convenience.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 in support of his request.

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's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 August 1989.  He successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual training at Fort Benning, Georgia.  On completion of his OSUT (one station unit training), he was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS), 11B, Light Weapons Infantryman.  He was promoted to pay grade E-3 on 1 January 1991. 

3.  The applicant was barred from reenlistment on 28 August 1990.  Item 10 (Other Factual and Relevant Indicators of Untrainability or Unsuitability) of his DA Form 4126-R (Bar to Reenlistment Certificate) indicates that the applicant failed to meet minimum required standards on two consecutive Army Physical Fitness Tests (APFT) as outlined in FM (Field Manual) 21-20.  He was overweight and was currently enrolled in the overweight program but failed to satisfactorily make minimum progress.  He also verbally expressed a lack of desire to correct his 



shortcoming.  His performance of duties did not meet the Army’s minimum standards; therefore, he did not possess the qualities for future service as a professional Soldier.  On 29 August 1990, the applicant indicated that he would not appeal his bar.

4.  On 31 August 1990, the applicant submitted a request to be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16, paragraph 16-5(b), due to his inability to overcome a locally imposed bar to reenlistment.  He understood that this request was for his own convenience and once separated that he would not be permitted to reenlist at a later date.  The appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request on 21 September 1990.

5.  On 9 July 1991, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16, paragraph 16-5(b) due to a locally imposed bar to reenlistment.  He was furnished an honorable discharge.  He had completed 1 year, 10 months, and 25 days of creditable service.  

6.  Item 26 (Separation Code), of the applicant's DD Form 214, shows the entry "KGF" and item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), shows the entry "Locally imposed Bar to Reenlistment." 

7.  Army Regulation 601-280 prescribes the eligibility criteria and options available in the Army Reenlistment Program.  Chapter 6 of the regulation provides for barring from reenlistment individuals whose continued active duty is not in the best interest of the military service.  This chapter specifies that bars will be used when immediate administrative discharge from active duty is not warranted.  Examples of rationale for reenlistment disqualification are, but not limited to, AWOL (absent without leave), indebtedness, recurrent nonjudicial punishment, slow promotion progression, no demonstrated potential for future service, substandard performance of duties, and substandard appearance (overweight).

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 16 covers discharges caused by changes in service obligation.  Paragraph 16-5b applies to personnel who are denied reenlistment and provided that, if they received a locally imposed bar to reenlistment, and are unable to overcome the bar, they may apply for immediate separation.




9.  Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at that time, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation shows that the separation program designator "KGF" as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214 specifies the narrative reason for discharge as "Locally Imposed Bar to Reenlistment" and that the authority for discharge under this separation program designator is "Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16, paragraph 16-5b."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was properly barred from reenlistment due to failure to meet the minimum required standards on two consecutive APFT’s, for being overweight and failing to make satisfactory minimum progress.  

2.  The applicant’s locally imposed bar to reenlistment was imposed in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  He was also advised he had the option of applying for discharge if he felt he could not overcome the bar to reenlistment.

3.  The applicant requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16, paragraph 16-5(b) on 31 August 1990; and, his request was approved by the appropriate authority.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16, paragraph 16-5b, due to a locally imposed bar to reenlistment based upon his request for discharge.  

4.  The Board notes the applicant’s narrative reason for separation is correct and in accordance with regulations then in effect.  He was also assigned the proper SPD code of "KGF" which corresponds with his narrative reason "Locally Imposed Bar to Reenlistment."  

5.  The applicant contends that item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), of his DD Form 214, is incorrect and that he was leaving the service because of base closure or military convenience.  However, the evidence shows he applied for discharge for his own convenience.  The applicant has provided no evidence to show that his unit/command was slated for base closure at the time of his discharge.  The applicant has provided no evidence to show that the narrative reason for his separation was in error or unjust.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), of his DD Form 214.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__amc___  _DAC___  _RB_____  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.




_____Ann M. Campbell____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070011478
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20080103
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19910708
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR .635-200, chapter 16-5b
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
110
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.