IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	       8 OCTOBER 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090011808 


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 correction of the narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show he was separated due to “completion of required service.”

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214 is incorrect.

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

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 record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years and entered active duty on 22 September 1983.  He completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 57E (Laundry and Bath Specialist).

3.  The applicant's records contain a DA Form 5180-R (Urinalysis Custody and Report Record), dated 23 January 1985, which shows he tested positive for Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) [Marijuana] and cocaine as a result of a urine sample he provided on 7 January 1985.

4.  The applicant's record contains a DA Form 4126-R (Bar to Reenlistment Certificate) in which his commander recommended that the applicant be barred from reenlistment in the Army for positive results on his urinalysis administered on 7 January 1985.  The applicant acknowledged with his signature that he was furnished a copy of his commanders recommendation to bar him from reenlistment.  He also acknowledged he was counseled and advised of the basis for the action and he indicated that he did not desire to submit a statement in his own behalf.

5.  On 16 May 1985, the applicant's battalion commander approved the bar to reenlistment.  The applicant was advised that if he felt he would be unable to overcome the bar to reenlistment he could apply for immediate discharge in accordance with Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 16.  He was further advised that such a discharge would be irrevocable and that he would not be permitted to reenlist at a later date.

6.  On 20 July 1985, the applicant requested that he be separated in accordance with paragraph 16-5 of AR 635-200.  In his request, the applicant acknowledged that he understood was being separated before his normal expiration term of service (ETS) for his own convenience and once separated he would not be permitted to reenlist at a later date.

7.  On 22 July 1985, the applicant's battalion commander approved his request for separation under the provisions of paragraph 16-5, AR 635-200.

8.  On 6 August 1985, the applicant was discharged.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of separation shows the narrative reason for separation was a locally imposed bar to reenlistment and the character of service is shown as honorable.  He was assigned the separation code of "KGF" and the reentry code of "3."


9.  Army Regulation 601-280 (Total Army Retention Program) governed bars to reenlistment at the time in question.  Essentially, this regulation provided that a Soldier could barred from reenlisting based on specific incidents of substandard performance and that any commander in the Soldier’s chain of command may initiate a bar to reenlistment.  Procedurally, the regulation required that a bar to reenlistment certificate be prepared and referred to the Soldier so he or she can submit a statement on his or her own behalf.  Each member of the chain of command must then endorse the bar to reenlistment to the proper approval authority.  The regulation required that the approval authority for a Soldier with less than 10 years' active Federal service at date of bar initiation must be personally approved by the first commander in the rank of lieutenant colonel or above in the Soldier's chain of command, or the commander exercising Special Court Martial Convening Authority, whichever is in the most direct line to the Soldier (unless this is the same commander who initiated the action).  The personal signature of the approving or disapproving authority is required.  The regulation also provided that the Soldier may appeal the bar to reenlistment and that final approval of appeals will be at least one approval level higher than the original bar approval authority. 

10.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) identifies the specific authorities, reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214 at the time of separation.  It shows, in pertinent part, that the SPD code of "KGF" should be used when the narrative reason of an enlisted Soldier's separation is "locally imposed bar to reenlistment."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that the narrative reason for separation on the DD Form 214 is incorrect was carefully considered.  However, the evidence of record shows that a locally imposed bar to reenlistment was imposed on the applicant as a result of a positive urinalysis and that he requested separation from the Army prior to the expiration of his 3 year term of enlistment.

2.  Given the foregoing, the narrative reason for separation is correctly annotated on the applicant's DD Form 214 and there is no basis to grant the requested relief.

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



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.




      _______ _   _XXX______   ___
               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)                                         AR20090011808



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1