ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 April 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160019341 APPLICANT REQUESTS: His narrative reason for separation be changed from "unsatisfactory performance" to another, unspecified reason that makes him eligible for full benefits. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), for the period ending 12 April 1994 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code (USC), Section 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: a. His unsatisfactory performance resulted from his failure of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) within 3 months of his return from deployment. He struggled with the run portion of the APFT throughout his period of service. b. He was treated the same as extreme drug users and violent criminals and was given the same discharge recommendations by his acting commander, being forced to be escorted as he went about his out-processing. c. He believes the negative discharge status has gone on long enough. He would like to be able to utilize his successful period of service in obtaining future employment and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 January 1988. He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 23 December 1991. 1. 4. The applicant failed a record APFT on 23 April 1993. He passed a diagnostic and record APFT then failed two record APFTs on 18 October 1993 and 18 January 1994. 5. The applicant's unit commander initiated separation actions against him on 28 February 1994, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 12-2f. He recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge. 6. The applicant consulted with legal counsel on 28 February 1994. a. He was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation due to failure of two consecutive APFTs. b. He acknowledged he understood that if he received a general discharge he could be deprived of some Army benefits under both Federal and State laws. c. He was advised he could submit any statements he desired in his own behalf. d. The applicant waived his rights to have his case review by a board of officers, a personal appearance, and to submit a statement in his own behalf. 7. The appropriate authority approved the separation request for discharge on 7 March 1994, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-2f, for unsatisfactory performance, and directed that the applicant receive an honorable characterization of service with transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve to complete his period of obligated service. 8. The applicant was discharged on 12 April 1994, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 by reason of unsatisfactory performance, and his service was characterized as honorable. His DD form 214 shows he was credited with completing 6 years, 3 months, and 8 days of service, with no lost time, and he was awarded the Army Achievement Medal and the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award). BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined that partial relief was warranted. Based upon the documentary evidence presented by the applicant and that found within the military service record, the Board found that the DD Form 214 accurately depicts the reason and level of discharge appropriate based upon the totality of the circumstances and that the applicant provided insufficient justification for making a change to the narrative reason for discharge. However, the Board also found that the DD Form 214 of the applicant failed to annotate the prior honorable service of the applicant and recommended that be corrected. For that reason, the Board recommended granting partial relief to the applicant. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF X X X GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by adding the following additional statement to block 18 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214: “Continuous honorable active service from 5 January 1988 until 23 December 1991.” 2. The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to changing the narrative reason for discharge. 184 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): A review of the applicant's record shows his DD Form 214, for the period ending 12 April 1994 is missing important entries that affect his eligibility for post-service benefits. As a result, amend the DD Form 214 by adding the following entries to item 18 (Remarks): * SOLDIER HAS COMPLETED FIRST FULL TERM OF SERVICE * IMMEDIATE REENLISTMENT THIS PERIOD FROM 880105 UNTIL 911223 * REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three 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 three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. b. Paragraph 13-2f, in effect at the time, provided that commanders would separate a Soldier for unsatisfactory performance when the Soldier without medical limitations had two consecutive APFT failures.