| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Ms. JoAnn H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his honorable discharge be corrected to show that he was discharged by reason of medical disability.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was unjustly discharged because he had high blood pressure and bad kidneys and no one would do anything to help him. These were the cause of his mental/physical problems at the time that led to his discharge and every time he sought help, he was sent back to the barracks.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in St. Louis, Missouri in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 31 August 1979, for a period of 6 years, assignment to a troop program unit in St. Louis, and training as a material supply specialist. He was 19 years of age at the time of his enlistment and he successfully completed his basic combat training (BCT) at Fort Jackson, South Carolina. He was transferred to Fort Lee, Virginia for his advanced individual training (AIT).
On 11 December 1979, he was relieved from the material supply specialist course for academic failure. His grade average for the course was 17.80% out of a possible 100% and the course director opined that the applicant did not have the ability or the motivation to do such academic type work. He indicated that the applicant had poor reading and writing skills and recommended that the applicant be enrolled in an infantry-type course, since he had no problems in BCT and if his USAR unit concurred. The applicant indicated that he desired to be either a journalist or a photographer.
On 12 December 1979, he was enrolled in a food service specialist course of instruction (AIT); however, he was dropped from that course on 15 February 1980, due to lack of motivation, excessive absenteeism, and lack of demonstrated ability or desire to complete the course.
On 22 February 1980, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of the Trainee Discharge Program (TDP), based on his marginal and/or non-productive performance. The applicant elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf and elected to have a separation medical examination conducted. A copy of that examination is not present in the available records.
The battalion commander interviewed the applicant and indicated that the applicant stated that he could not read and understand the course material and simply wanted out of the Army. The battalion commander opined that further training would be a waste of resources and recommended that he be discharged.
The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 27 February 1980, and directed that he be furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 3 March 1980, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33 for marginal or non- productive performance. He had served 5 months and 13 days of total active service.
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. Chapter 5 of that regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of personnel for unsatisfactory performance or conduct (or both) while in an entry level status (less than 180 days of active service). This policy applied to individuals who have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention because they cannot meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training and they lack the aptitude, ability, motivation or self-discipline for military service, or that they have demonstrated characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service. Personnel separated under that provision would have their service characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions. Under current standards, personnel separated in an entry level status will be separated with their service uncharacterized.
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. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate given the circumstances in the case.
3. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant was deemed fit for separation or he would not have been discharged until such time as his medical condition was resolved. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his case or the evidence of record that such was not the case.
4. 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 or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
5. 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
___jhl___ __rwa ___ ___wtm__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001063669 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/03/14 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1980/03/03 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Tdp |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 191 | 110.0200/rsn |
| 2. 538 | 144.3100/a31.00 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058070C070420
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 | CY2002 | 2002075510C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 5 March 1985, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. Previously, Army Regulation 635-200, the pertinent paragraph in chapter 5, provided that commanders could expeditiously discharge members under the TDP who lacked the necessary motivation, discipline,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085406C070212
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 | CY2012 | 20120002718
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Therefore, he should not have been discharged from the Army under the Trainee Discharge Program. On 30 July 1979, his commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-33 (TDP).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000981
The applicant provides: * VA Form 21-22 (Appointment of Veterans Service Organization (VSO) as Claimant's Representative) * Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Form 871-R (Trainee Discharge Program (TDP) Counseling) * 5 pages of TDP paperwork, dated 10 December 1979, subject: Proposed Discharge Action Under the Provisions of the TDP * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE: 1. c. He was also advised that, if he did not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003992
The applicant provides: * Self-authored statement about her life, family, financial situation, and other issues * VA letter, dated 2 November 1984 * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * MIARNG discharge letter, dated 3 February 1982 * DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document) * Enlistment and discharge Standard Forms (SF) 93 (Report of Medical History) * SF 88 (Report of Medical Examination) prepared at the time of enlistment and discharge * Enlistment...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012469
He provides: * three self-authored letters, dated 21 March 2010, 30 May 2010, and 13 July 2010 * an appeal from the Board of Veterans Appeals, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Washington, DC, dated 20 October 2008 * a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * a DA Form 2 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part I) * a DD Form 1966/5 (Record of Military Processing - Armed Forces of the United States) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 21 March 2010, he submitted a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711697
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 | CY2010 | 20100018446
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) by adding a more specific narrative reason for discharge. The record does contain a Headquarters, U.S. Army Signal Center, Fort Gordon letter, dated 7 July 1975, which informed the applicant he was being separated from active duty under the provisions of Department of the Army (DA) Message (Msg) DAPE-MPE, August 1973, under the Trainee Discharge Program (TDP). Further, there is no...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040007387C070208
On 8 October 1980, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of paragraph 5-33, Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), the Trainee Discharge Program, due to his immature attitude, his inability to cope with situations while under stress, and his lack of self discipline which reveals considerable behavioral characteristics that are not compatible with continued military service. Line X of the...