IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 30 May 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120019478
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 that his records be corrected to show he was promoted to the pay grade of E-5.
2. The applicant states he was kept from reenlistment by his sergeant even though he had excellent ratings for reenlistment. He also states that he would have been promoted to the pay grade of E-5 had he been allowed to reenlist and he wants his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show he deserved an E-5 rating.
3. The applicant provides a statement of his claim and a page from his medical records showing that he had lost 29 pounds as of 11 January 1983.
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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 July 1979 for a period of 4 years, training as an armor crewman, and a cash enlistment bonus. He completed his one-station unit training at Fort Knox, Kentucky and was transferred to Fort Hood, Texas for his first duty assignment. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 August 1981.
3. On 25 September 1981, he was transferred to Germany for assignment to a cavalry troop. On 26 March 1982, he was placed in the Army Weight Control Program for weighing 226 pounds when he was only authorized to weigh 186 pounds.
4. He remained in the weight control program, and on 15 September 1982 he weighed 202 pounds. The commander initiated action to bar him from reenlistment for apathy related to his overweight condition.
5. The applicant declined the opportunity to submit matters in his own behalf and the battalion commander approved the bar to reenlistment on 1 October 1982, which placed the applicant in a non-promotable status.
6. On 8 July 1983, the applicant was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) in the pay grade of E-4. He had served 3 years, 11 months, and 29 days of active service and was transferred to a U.S. Army Reserve Troop Program Unit in Waco, Texas.
7. A review of his official records shows that he was still on the Weight Control Program at the time of his REFRAD. His records also show no evidence of his being on the E-5 promotion standing list.
8. A review of his records also failed to show that the applicants overweight condition was caused by a medical problem.
9. Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Promotions) in effect at the time served as the authority for enlisted promotions. It provided, in pertinent part, that individuals who were under a suspension of favorable personnel actions (FLAG) or barred from reenlistment were in a nonpromotable status and not eligible for advancement or promotion.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants contention that he would have been promoted to the pay grade of E-5 had he been able to reenlist has been noted; however, he has failed to show through the evidence of record and the evidence submitted with his application that he was ever eligible for advancement to the pay grade of E-5.
2. The applicant was in the overweight program from 26 March 1982 until he was REFRAD on 8 July 1983 and he has failed to show that he was improperly placed in the weight control program. Additionally, there is no evidence to show that he ever attained promotion list standing.
3. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to show otherwise, there appears to be no basis to grant the applicants 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) AR20120019478
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120019478
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9108000
Also, he now requests, in effect, placement on the permanent disability retired list, removal of the enlisted evaluation report (EER) covering the period September 1977-August 1978 as a partial basis for the HQDA bar to reenlistment, and the award of the Good Conduct Medal (6th Award). On 3 April 1989, the Board of Veterans Appeals, indicated that the applicant had active service from May 1970 to April 1972 and from December 1972 to March 1986; that the applicant had a transitory psychotic...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090647C070212
He was denied extension of his enlistment at his expiration term of service (ETS) but the underlying reason was a suspension of favorable personnel actions for being on the Army's weight control program. The 24 January 2002 letter from The Office of the Adjutant General, State of California indicates the applicant's unit requested a one-time waiver, not to exceed 12 months, in order for him to extend to qualify towards attaining 20 qualifying years for retirement. Since he was 48 years old...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088078C070403
The applicant states, in a self-authored statement, that based on his service record his discharge should show that he was separated honorably and not for unsatisfactory performance. He indicated that a discharge would be appropriate. Today enlisted Soldiers who do fail to comply with the Army’s weight control program are administratively separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 18 (Failure to Meet Body Fat Standards) and item 28 (narrative reason for separation)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011896
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110011896 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. __________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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711587
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 9 January 1984, his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014727
The applicant states, in effect, that he was discharged from the Army with an honorable discharge in July 1979, with over 19 years of service, and the Army would not let him reenlist. It stated that a member serving in the Active Army who desired to reenlist or extend a current enlistment would submit a DA Form 3340 (Request for Regular Army Reenlistment or Extension) to his immediate commander. The evidence shows that the applicant was found to be overweight and was enrolled in the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9506078C070209
He states that he was illegally denied reenlistment which was later corrected by his being authorized an antedated reenlistment. In support of his application he submits a letter from his commander who confirms that the applicant was occupying an E-8 position, that he had forwarded promotion packets for the applicant, and that the applicant was separated under the QMP without being issued a 20 year letter. The USARC recommended that the Board validate the revocation of his 1986 discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006468
The commander advised him of his right to: * be represented by counsel * submit statements in his own behalf * review documents to be presented to the separation authority * waive any of these rights * withdraw any waiver of rights at any time prior to the date the discharge authority directs or approves his discharge 11. On 23 December 1983, he was released from active duty by reason of failure to meet body fat standards under the provisions of chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200. Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025142
His records show he underwent several unit weigh-ins during 1982 and 1983 and in each case he exceeded the weight and height table of Army Regulation 600-9 (The Army Weight Control Program). On 7 February 1984, the applicants immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 13 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of unsatisfactory performance. The evidence of record shows the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016105
The applicant states she was barred from reenlistment on 30 November 1982 for weight control. On 30 November 1982, her commander initiated a Bar to Reenlistment Certificate due to her NJP on 26 January 1981 for being AWOL. There is no evidence her varicose veins or possible asthma prevented her from performing the duties of her rank and MOS.