IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 12 August 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080008802
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests, in effect, that his narrative reason for discharge be changed.
2. The applicant states that his records show he failed the U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery Officer Basic Course at Fort Bliss, Texas when he was unable to reschedule his final test due to dental extractions. He states that eleven African American students were rifted out of the school for whatever racial reason and there was a policy of expelling any African Americans. He also states that he is disabled due to this trauma in his life. He wants closure, disability, and a pension from the Army.
3. The applicant provides no additional documents in support of his application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. The applicant was appointed as a Reserve second lieutenant on 27 May 1983 in the Air Defense Branch.
3. He was ordered to active duty on 30 May 1983 to attend the U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery Officer Basic Course.
4. The applicant was interviewed on 15 August 1983 by a U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery School Faculty Board. By unanimous vote, the Board voted to recommend that the applicant be relieved from the course for failure to maintain academic course standards required for graduation and discharged from his reserve commission under the provisions of Section II, Chapter 3, Army Regulation 635-100.
5. On 25 August 1983, the separation authority approved the Faculty Board recommendations that the applicant be relieved from the U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery Officer Basic Course for failure to maintain academic course standards required for graduation and discharged from his reserve commission under the provisions of Section II, Chapter 3, Army Regulation 635-100.
6. The applicant was honorably discharged on 12 September 1983 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-100, chapter 3, section II by reason of failure to meet course standards. He was discharged with a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of "JHF" (Failed to Meet Course Standards).
7. On 21 August 1996, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicants request for a change of the narrative reason of his discharge.
8. Army Regulation 635-100 (Officer Personnel), Chapter 3, Section II, subparagraph 3-20 stated that officers of the Army National Guard of the United States and the United States Army Reserve having less than 3 years commissioned service who failed to meet standards of service schools while attending Branch Orientation or Familiarization courses of their basic or detailed branch or a course to provide initial branch or specialty qualification, due to misconduct, moral or professional dereliction, or academic or leadership deficiencies would be relieved from active duty or active duty training and would be discharged from their Reserve commissions.
9. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) prescribes the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons. The regulation shows that the separation program designator JHF as shown on the applicants DD Form 214 specifies the narrative reason for discharge as Failed to Meet Course Standards and that the authority for discharge under this separation program designator is
AR 635-100, chapter 3, section II."
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants discharge proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-100, Chapter 3, Section II were administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.
2. Considering the applicant's failure to maintain academic course standards required for graduation, it appears the chain of command determined that elimination under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-100, Chapter 3, Section II was appropriate.
3. The applicants DD Form 214 shows he was discharged with a separation code of JHF in accordance with the governing regulation.
4. The applicants contentions are noted. However, there is no evidence of record to substantiate his claims.
5. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record that the separation code issued to him was administratively incorrect, in error, or unjust.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___xx___ __xx____ ___xx___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
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.
_______ xxxx_______ ___
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.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080008802
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080008802
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011507C070208
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), his DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), and his NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) to reflect non-completion instead of failure to complete the Field Artillery Officer Basic Course (FAOBC) at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. The applicant states that his records are in error because he resigned his commission in February 1994 at the FAOBC. He states...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060016078C071029
A Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER) dated 12 May 2003, the date of the MPOBC graduation ceremony, certified that the applicant had completed all requirements for the course. The recommendation would include, among other requirements, the specific category of paragraph 3 that pertained to the student’s recommendation for elimination; the academic performance of the student; recommendations for disposition from the chain of command; a statement about graduation requirements that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 1997002263C070209
On 20 January 1995, three voting members, a recorder and a lay counsel were appointed to a U. S. Army Infantry School Faculty Board to determine if the applicant, who was to appear before the board for the reason of academic deficiency (land navigation) was suitable for continued service and retention of his commission. The recorder stated that the applicant had failed to meet a clear-cut, established standard which the Infantry School had determined is essential for an infantry leader. In...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 1997002263
On 20 January 1995, three voting members, a recorder and a lay counsel were appointed to a U. S. Army Infantry School Faculty Board to determine if the applicant, who was to appear before the board for the reason of academic deficiency (land navigation) was suitable for continued service and retention of his commission. He was informed that following the completion of the faculty board hearing, the proceedings would be forwarded to the Commandant, USAIS for review, who would review the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01484
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01484 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Block 26, Separation Code, JHF and Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, Failure to Complete a Course of Instruction be corrected to accurately reflect his characterization of service. Only after he completed these final evaluations and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000413
The applicant provides: * a self-authored statement * OERs, dated June 1991 through December 1995 * Written Communications Skills Tests * Summation of Testimony for USAIS Faculty Board * Appeal of USAIS Faculty Board * Documents Granting and Denying Appeal * Letters of Recommendation and Commendation * OERs from 1996 to present day COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provided an undated appeal of the Faculty Board's decision to the USAIS on 24 March 1995. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019721
The applicant requests correction of his records to show he graduated from Officer Candidate School (OCS) and that he be commissioned as an officer in the U.S. Army. In counsel's 15 January 2010 letter in response to the advisory opinion, he states that they disagree with the advisory opinion and request that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) not adhere to the ODCS, G-1's position. As indicated in the advisory opinion, there is no evidence the applicant...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011464
The AG office said no branch would take me because I was prior Navy and they cut me orders for seperation and ignored the Show Cause board results. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants available military records during the term of service under review, the documents, and the issues submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the narrative reason for discharge on the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607787C070209
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he appeared before a faculty board for nonacademic relief from the Anesthesia Nurse Program to determine if he should be dismissed from the program based on allegations that he had falsified his Self Evaluation Examination (SEE) test scores, falsified a Standard Form (SF) 517, and for conduct unbecoming an officer. However, before the appointing authority could act on the findings and recommendation of the faculty board, additional information was submitted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060985C070421
The Director, Academic Department and the former Commandant both indicated that the three majors who graded the applicant’s research paper were highly respected members of the faculty, the applicant’s research paper did not receive a higher degree of scrutiny, and that minorities were not evaluated differently. Degree by school officials in the applicant’s case. Degree standards, read the applicant’s research paper, concurred with the evaluation by the Academic Department Director, and...