Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711694
Original file (9711694.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That the narrative reason for separation shown on his DD Form 214 be changed.
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, his enlistment physical examination did not detect that he had a mental disability (bi-polar disorder). After he enlisted, his depression, high blood pressure and manic side started showing up. He wants the reason for discharge changed so he may be eligible for his benefits.

 EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant’s military records show:

On 6 August 1980, he enlisted in the Regular Army.

On 8 October 1980, the commander initiated separation action on the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5, trainee discharge program. The commander noted that the applicant failed to qualify with his basic weapon after five attempts. The commander also noted in a counseling statement that the applicant had medical problems with ingrown toenails and appeared to display a constant mood change toward training in that, one day he tried to excel and the next day he strongly desired to be discharged. His medical records are not available to medically substantiate this comment.

On 15 October 1980, the applicant acknowledged notification of the action, made no statement, and checked that he did not wish a final type physical exam.

On 23 October 1980, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed he be given an honorable discharge.

On 28 October 1980, he was discharged with an honorable discharge in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5. He had completed 2 months and 23 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The pertinent paragraph in Chapter 5 provides that commanders may expeditiously discharge members who lack the necessary motivation, discipline, ability or aptitude to become productive soldiers when these individuals were voluntarily enlisted in the Regular Army, Army National Guard or U.S. Army Reserve; are in basic training or in advanced individual training and have completed no more than 179 days active duty or initial active duty for training on current enlistment by the date of discharge; and have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention for reasons such as demonstrating character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service

DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. 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. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2. The applicant’s separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights. The narrative reason shown on his DD Form 214 is the narrative reason associated with the trainee discharge program.

3. The applicant was given an opportunity to undergo a final separation physical and chose to forego the same.

4. The documentation the applicant supplies to support his claim states his present illness started on 10 October 1989, nine years after he was discharged.

5. VA benefits are authorized based upon the type of discharge given; an honorable discharge generally entitles a veteran to all benefits. However, the VA may set time-in-service criteria for certain benefits. If the VA is denying the applicant certain benefits because he did not complete a set amount of time in the service, he should contact the VA for a possible waiver.

6. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

 DETERMINATION : The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.






BOARD VOTE :
GRANT

 GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION




         Loren G. Harrell
                                                      Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001612C070206

    Original file (20050001612C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board to have the reason for his separation changed within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001612C070206

    Original file (20050001612C070206.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board to have the reason for his separation changed within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085406C070212

    Original file (2003085406C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, on 4 September 1981, the applicant was discharged with an honorable discharge. Item 26 (Separation Code) on the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the entry “JET.” Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes), in effect at the time, states the reason for discharge based on separation code “JET” is “Trainee Discharge Program (TDP) Marginal or nonproductive” and the regulatory authority is Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33f(2). The regulation essentially...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058070C070420

    Original file (2001058070C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Accordingly, the applicant was honorably released from active duty on 12 December 1980 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33f(1), under the Trainee Discharge Program, and transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve. However, evidence of record shows that the applicant was dropped from the “71G10 Course” on 5 November 1980. The applicant’s contention that she was denied the right to appear before a board to stay in the USAR is not supported by the evidence of record.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711697

    Original file (9711697.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 20 January 1981 the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004063

    Original file (20090004063.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He goes on to state that he enlisted at the age of 16 with his guardian's consent long before he departed for basic training and his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) does not reflect this information. The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's administrative separation are not present in the available records; however, the records do contain a duly constituted DD Form 214 signed by the applicant which shows that he was honorably discharged on 1...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007747

    Original file (20070007747.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    If he failed to successfully complete the basic training program, he would be discharged from the Reserve. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned reentry codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. The evidence shows the applicant enlisted in the Reserve under the alternate training program.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004106626C070208

    Original file (2004106626C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    An honorable discharge was authorized for members separating under this provision. In accordance with the regulation in effect at the time, the narrative reason for separation for members separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-33f(2), Army Regulation 635-200 was “Trainee Discharge Program (TDP) Marginal or nonproductive”, as is recorded in Item 28 of the applicant’s DD Form 214. Thus, there appears to be no error or injustice related to this entry and as a result, there is an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017470

    Original file (20090017470.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of the reason for his separation from an honorable discharge under the trainee discharge program (TDP) to a medical discharge. On 12 August 1980, the applicant's immediate commander advised the applicant that he intended to recommend his discharge from the Army under the provisions of paragraph 5-33 (TDP) of Army Regulation 635-200.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000312

    Original file (20120000312.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On or about 3 June 1980, the commander initiated action to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-33f(2), trainee discharge program (TDP). The regulation essentially requires that the service member must have voluntarily enlisted; must be in basic, advanced individual training, on the job, or service school training prior to award of a military occupational specialty and must not have completed more...