ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
IN THE CASE OF:  BOARD DATE: 6 May 2021 DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20200001699 
APPLICANT REQUESTS: change the authority on Headquarters (HQs), Fifth United States Army Order Number 17-14 from paragraph 12-1 to paragraph 14-1k. 
APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 
• 
DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) 

• 
DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) 

• 
Letter from L__, Jr., Medical Doctor (MD) 

• 
Company (CO) D, 245 Engineer (EN) Battalion (BN) Memorandum dated 7 September 1989 

• 
First Endorsement 

• 
Routing and Transmittal Slip 

• 
CO D, 245 EN BN Memorandum dated 20 January 1990 

• 
CO D, 245 EN BN Memorandum dated 26 March 1990 

• 
HQs, 420 Engineer Brigade (BDE) Order Number 420-90-3738 

• 
HQs, 420 EN BDE Order Number 420-90-3897 

• 
Medical Records 


FACTS: 
1. 
The applicant did not file within the three-year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code § 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 

2. 
The applicant states in effect, he was discharged from the United States Army Reserve (USAR) for medical reasons and he request that HQs, Fifth U.S. Army Order Number 17-14 be amended to reflect the authority of discharge as Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 14-1k. His order states paragraph 12-1, which is for misconduct. 

3. 
The applicant provides: 


a. 
Letter from P__, Jr. MD, dated 18 May 1989, which states the applicant was under his care for osteomyelitis of the left leg and was unable to wear Army boots. It was the doctor’s belief that this condition might preclude him from continued service. 

b. 
Routing Transmittal Slip, dated 6 November 1989, which states per Colonel (COL) D__, the applicant needed further evaluation by an Active Duty Orthopedist at Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, TX. 

c. 
HQs, 420 EN BDE Order Number 420-90-3897, shows the applicant was ordered to report to Fort Sam Houston, TX on 31 July 1990 for a medical appointment for a board. 

d. 
Six pages of medical records, which states the applicant was physically unfit for induction and retention standards and should not have been allowed to enlist. See attached for further details. 


4. A review of the applicant’s service record shows: 
a. He enlisted in the USAR on 1 July 1986. 
b. 
His DD Form 214 shows he was ordered to active duty for training on 2 September 1986. He was released from active duty on 12 December 1986. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 3 months and 11 days of active service. 

c. 
On 10 April 1988, he was placed on the Army Weight Control Program. On 23 August 1988, he was removed from the program. 

d. 
On 7 September 1989, his commander requested an appointment for the applicant for a medical evaluation. An appointment was scheduled for an orthopedic consult with COL D__ on 4 November 1989. 

e. 
On 5 September 1989, his DARP Form 249 (Chronological Statement of Retirement Points) shows the applicant had not performed military duty for the period of 1 July 1988 through 30 June 1989. 

f. 
On 20 January 1990, his commander requested assistance in obtaining a travel order on the applicant to be evaluated for an anticipated medical discharge. 

g. 
On 26 March 1990, the commander requested a follow up on his request for a travel order for the applicant to attend a medical appointment at Fort Sam Houston, TX. 

h. 
The applicant was order to report to Fort Sam Houston, TX on 12 July 1990 for a medical appoint for board processing. 

i. 
He was honorably discharged from the USAR on 25 January 1991, under the provisions of AR 135-178, paragraph 12-1 (Medically unfit for retention). 


5. By regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel), establishes policies, standards, and procedures governing the administrative separation of enlisted soldiers from the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and the United States Army Reserve (USAR). It is the policy of the Department of the Army to promote readiness of the Army by maintaining high standards of conduct and performance. 
BOARD DISCUSSION: 
1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicants request, supporting documents and evidence in the records. The Board considered the 
applicant’s statement, his military service record and documents provided by the 
applicant and the policy (AR 135-178) in effect at the time of the applicant's separation. The Board determined the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. The Board found the record to be absent of evidence to support the applicant’s request to change the authority on Headquarters (HQs), Fifth United States Army Order Number 17-14 from paragraph 12-1 to paragraph 14-1k.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 
2. The Army has an interest in maintaining the integrity of its records for historical purposes. The information in those records must reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the time the records were created.  In the absence of evidence that shows a material error or injustice, there is a reluctance to recommend that those records be changed. 
BOARD VOTE: 
Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 
: : : GRANT FULL RELIEF 
: : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 
: : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING 
XXX XX XXX DENY APPLICATION 
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 
The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined 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. 
REFERENCES: 
1. 
Title 10, United States Code § 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 ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 

2. 
Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel), in effect at the time, establishes policies, standards, and procedures governing the administrative separation of enlisted soldiers from the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and the United States Army Reserve (USAR). It is the policy of the 


Department of the Army to promote readiness of the Army by maintaining high standards of conduct and performance. 
a.  Paragraph 12-1 (Medically unfit for retention), separation will be accomplished by separation authorities when it has been determined that an enlisted Soldier is no longer qualified for retention by reason of medical unfitness unless the Soldier requests and is granted a waiver or eligible for transfer to the Retired Reserve. 
b.  This regulation at the time the applicant was separated did not have a chapter 14. 
//NOTHING FOLLOWS//