RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          26 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004335


      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             |
|     |Ms. Wanda L. Waller               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James Vick                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Conrad Meyer                  |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda Barker                  |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his honorable discharge be
changed to a medical discharge.

2.  The applicant states he could not adapt to military life.  He contends
that he is ill from manic depression and that he is psychotic and more.  He
also states he has been disabled for many years, that he believes he
deserves help (medical and financial) from the Army, and that he should
have been given a medical discharge.

3.  The applicant provides no evidence in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 31 August 1977.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 3 February 2005.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant underwent an enlistment physical examination on 20 June
1977 and was found qualified for enlistment with a physical profile of
111111.  He reported that “I am in good health.  No meds.” in item 8
(Statement of Examinee’s Present Health and Medications Currently Used) on
his Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History), dated 20 June 1977.

4.  The applicant enlisted on 6 July 1977 for a period of 3 years.

5.  TRADOC Form 871-R (TDP [Trainee Discharge Program] Counseling), dated 9
August 1977, states the applicant reported that he had a problem with his
nerves and could not adapt to the Army.  This form also states the
applicant was evaluated by a mental health counselor who found nothing
mentally wrong with him.

6.  While in basic combat training, on 22 August 1977, the applicant was
notified of his pending separation under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200, paragraph 5-39, the Trainee Discharge Program.  The unit commander
cited that the applicant had demonstrated a very negative attitude towards
the Army, that he lacked motivation and self discipline, and that he had
shown very low aptitude as evidenced by his low scores on the Phase I and
Phase II tests.  He also cited that the applicant’s continued presence was
a detriment to the other members of the company and that he had shown very
little potential for ever becoming a productive Soldier.

7.  On 22 August 1977, the applicant acknowledged notification of his
pending separation and proposed Honorable Discharge.  He indicated that if
he did not have sufficient prior service, he understood that due to non-
completion of requisite active duty time, Department of Veterans Affairs
and other benefits normally associated with completion of honorable active
duty service would be affected.  He elected not to make a statement on his
behalf, he declined a separation medical examination, and he declined the
opportunity to consult with counsel.

8.  On 26 August 1977, the separation authority approved the recommendation
for separation and directed that the applicant be furnished an honorable
discharge.

9.  Accordingly, the applicant was honorably discharged on 31 August 1977
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-39, the
Trainee Discharge Program.  He had completed 1 month and 25 days of
creditable active service.

10.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s service personnel records
which shows he was diagnosed with any mental or medical condition prior to
his discharge.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic
authority for separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5 provides for
separation for the convenience of the Government.  This chapter, in
pertinent part, states that the Trainee Discharge Program provides that
commanders may expeditiously discharge members who lack the necessary
motivation, discipline, ability, or aptitude to become a productive Soldier
when they were voluntarily enlisted in the Regular Army, Army National
Guard, or U.S. Army Reserve; or are in basic combat training or basic
training or in military occupational specialty training (MOS) in advanced
individual training, a service school or on job training prior to the award
of the MOS for which being trained and will have completed no more than 179
days active duty, or initial active duty for training, on current
enlistment by the date of discharge.

12.  Title 10, United States Code, chapter 61, provides disability
retirement or separation for a member who is physically unfit to perform
the duties of his office, rank, grade or rating because of disability
incurred while entitled to basic pay.

13.  Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation for physical fitness of
Soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of
physical disability.  It states that the mere presence of an impairment
does not, of itself, justify a finding of unfitness because of physical
disability.

14.  Chapter 7 (Physical Profiling) of Army Regulation 40-501 (Standards of
Medical Fitness) provides that the basic purpose of the physical profile
serial system is to provide an index to the overall functional capacity of
an individual and is used to assist the unit commander and personnel
officer in their determination of what duty assignments the individual is
capable of performing, and if reclassification action is warranted.  Four
numerical designations (1-4) are used to reflect different levels of
functional capacity in six factors (PULHES): P-
physical capacity or stamina, U-upper extremities, L-lower extremities, H-
hearing
and ears, E-eyes, and S-psychiatric.  Numerical designator "1" under all
factors indicates that an individual is considered to possess a high level
of medical fitness and, consequently, is medically fit for any military
assignment.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant contends that he should have been given a
medical discharge, evidence of record shows he underwent an enlistment
physical examination on 20 June 1977 and was found qualified for enlistment
with a physical profile of 111111 by competent medical authorities.  The
applicant also reported that he was in good health at that time.  Evidence
of record shows the applicant declined a separation physical examination
two months later on
22 August 1977.  There is no medical evidence of record that shows the
applicant had any mental or medical condition prior to his discharge on
31 August 1977.  There is also no evidence of record to show he was ever
medically unfit to perform his duties.  Therefore, there is insufficient
evidence to show the applicant was eligible for physical disability
processing and there is no basis for a medical discharge.

2.  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.  He had an opportunity to
submit a statement in which he could have voiced his concerns and he failed
to do so.

3.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons for separation were
appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged injustice
now under consideration on 31 August 1977; therefore, the time for the
applicant to file a request for correction of any injustice expired on 30
August 1980.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of
limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to
show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to
timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

JV_____  CM_____  _LB_____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of
limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the
individual concerned.




            ___James Vick_________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004335                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051026                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19770831                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200 Paragraph 5-39               |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Trainee Discharge Program               |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |108.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]