IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  8 January 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080016695 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, amendment to Item 26 (Separation Code) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that Item 26 should read something else besides "KGF."  He also states that he was discharged due to failing the BNCOC [Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course] and that should not be held against him.  He further states, in effect, that he should be entitled to serve in the Army National Guard or the Army Reserve.  He served 10 1/2 years for his country and he thinks someone made a mistake.

3.  In support of his application, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214.

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 military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-1, on 30 March 1982, for 3 years.  He completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 88M (Motor Transport Operator).  He was promoted to pay grade E-5 on 1 March 1987.  

3.  The applicant's records contain a DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 22 September 1991, that shows he did not meet the established academic criteria for the Motor Transport Operator Course – BNCOC.  

4.  On 4 December 1991, the applicant's unit commander initiated a locally imposed Bar to Reenlistment.  The unit commander stated that the applicant was released from BNCOC Class #12-19, 88M3O.  The applicant had failed map reading two times and also failed the leadership area of Personnel and Performance Counseling where he was retested and passed.  On the same date, the applicant acknowledged the proposed action and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The Bar to Reenlistment was approved on
24 January 1992.

5.  On 13 February 1992, the applicant was advised of the approval of the locally imposed Bar to Reenlistment and advised of his rights.  He indicated that he would not appeal the Bar to Reenlistment.

6.  On 10 July 1992, the applicant was issued a Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) Imposed Bar to Reenlistment under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP).  He was advised that the Calendar Year 1992 Master Sergeant Selection Board, after a comprehensive review of his official military personnel file, determined that he was to be barred from reenlistment.

7.  On 17 August 1992, the applicant acknowledged the HQDA imposed bar to reenlistment under the QMP.  He was also required to complete USAEREC Form 51 (Statement of Option), which included Option 1 – I will submit an appeal; Option 2 – I will not submit an appeal; and Option 3 – I request to be discharged. The applicant elected Option 3 with a requested discharge date of 17 November 1992.



8.  The applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-5, on 18 November 1992, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5a, by reason of HQDA Imposed Bar to Reenlistment.  He was credited with 10 years, 7 months, and 19 days net active service.  His service was characterized as honorable with a separation code of KGF.

9.  The evidence, a properly completed DD Form 214, contains the applicant's signature which attests to the completeness and the accuracy of information shown on the DD Form 214.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 16-5a, in effect at the time, specified that a Soldier denied reenlistment could be voluntarily separated before the expiration of their term of service due to a HQDA imposed bar to reenlistment.  Soldiers who perceive that they would be unable to overcome an HQDA bar to reenlistment would be discharged upon their request.  The service of Soldiers separated under that paragraph would be characterized as honorable.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD Codes)), in effect at the time, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or 
other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the SPDs to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation showed that the SPD for "KGF," as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214, was appropriate for voluntary discharge when the narrative reason for discharge was "HQDA Imposed Bar to Reenlistment" and that the authority for discharge under that SPD was Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5a.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the applicant is not entitled to amendment to Item 26 of his DD Form 214.  He has not shown error, injustice, or inequity meriting the relief he now requests.

2.  The applicant contends that Item 26 is incorrect.  However, he has failed to show that the Separation Code applied to his DD Form 214 is incorrect.  Pertinent regulation shows that the SPD code "KGF," as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214, is appropriate for the type of discharge received.  

3.  The applicant's separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

4.  The evidence shows the applicant was locally barred from reenlistment for failing to complete BNCOC.  He elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  The bar to reenlistment was subsequently approved on 24 January 1992. In July 1992, the Calendar Year 1992 Master Sergeant Selection Board, after a comprehensive review of his official military personnel file, determined that he be barred to reenlistment under the QMP.  He acknowledged the HQDA imposed bar to reenlistment under the QMP.  He completed USAEREC Form 51, selecting Option 3, voluntary request for discharge with a requested discharge date of
17 November 1992.  The bar to reenlistment was imposed in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show, to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

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

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__x_____  ____x___  ____x___  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.



      ___________x___________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080016695



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1


ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080016695


4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1