PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            29 August 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2000038838

	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	
	Mr. Walter Avery, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John D. Miller		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. Charles Gainor		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show his award of the Army Achievement Medal (AAM) and that the narrative reason on his DD Form 214 (separation document) be changed.

3.  The applicant states that he was awarded an AAM and that the narrative reason of Unsatisfactory Performance on his DD 214 should also indicate that he could not pass the Army physical fitness test (APFT) due to a left and right knee condition. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 July 1995 and completed the light wheel vehicle mechanic course.  He was honorably discharged on 28 August 1996, under the authority of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance.

5.  His DD 214 shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, and the Sharpshooter Badge with Rifle Bar.

6.  On 6 March 1996 a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award) was signed by the approving authority awarding the applicant an AAM.

7.  On 19 April and 17 July 1996 the applicant failed record APFT’s.

8.  On 6 June 1996 the applicant was examined and found to be fit for participation in a Weight Control/Physical exercise program.

9.  The applicant’s company commander advised him of his intention to recommend the applicant for separation under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13.  The commander made no note of medical information to be considered.

10.  The applicant acknowledged that he had been advised by counsel of his rights and that the basis for the action being considered was his failure of two consecutive APFT’s.  The applicant indicated he would be submitting a statement in his own behalf, but none is present in the record.

11.  AR 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.

12.  AR 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) provides, in pertinent part, that the narrative reason for a AR 635-200, chapter 13 discharge is Unsatisfactory Performance.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board accepts the DA Form 638 as evidence that the applicant was awarded the AAM and his records should be corrected to reflect that award.

2.  The applicant's allegation that his failure of the two APFTs was due to a medical condition is unsupported by the available evidence of record and he has provided no evidence to support his claim.

3.  The applicant was released from active duty prior to the completion of his enlistment obligation under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 13, which requires that the narrative reason of Unsatisfactory Performance be reflected on his DD Form 214.  Therefore, his current narrative reason is correct. 

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected, but only as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing the individual concerned was awarded the Army Achievement Medal.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

___jdm__  ___rwa__  ___cg___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__________John D. Miller_____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038838	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000829	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0025	
2.	110.0200	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.