IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  20 January 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100018446 


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, correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) by adding a more specific narrative reason for discharge.

2.  The applicant states the narrative reason for his discharge needs to be more specific to satisfy information requested for a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) claim.

3.  The applicant provides a VA doctor’s letter, dated 28 May 2010, 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 applicant’s 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 applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 February 1975, and he completed basic combat training (BCT) at Fort Jackson, SC.  Upon completion of BCT, he was assigned to Fort Gordon, GA to attend advanced individual training (AIT) in military occupational specialty (MOS) O5F (Radio/Teletype Operator).  He arrived at AIT on 12 April 1975.

3.  The record shows the applicant never advanced above the grade of private (PV1)/E-1 while serving on active duty.  It further shows that while attending AIT, he accepted non-judicial punishment on the following two separate occasions for the offenses indicated:

	a.  22 April 1975, for twice failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 21 April 1975; and

	b.  13 May 1975, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 9 May 1975 and having an unclean uniform and failing to maintain property on 10 May 1975.

4.  The applicant’s record is void of any medical records or treatment documents indicating he suffered from any mental or physical condition at the time of his discharge processing that rendered him unfit for further service or that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. 

5.  A separation packet containing the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s discharge processing is not in the available record.  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).

6.  The record also contains a DD Form 214 issued to the applicant upon his discharge on 7 July 1975 that lists in item 6 (Authority and Reason) the entry “DA Msg DAPE-MPE Aug 73 SPD JNF (See Item 27).”  Item 27 (Remarks) further shows the entry “Trainee Discharge Program.”

7.  The DD Form 214 also shows the applicant held the rank/grade of PV1/E-1 and he had completed a total of 4 months and 27 days of total active service at the time of his discharge.  It also shows he never completed AIT and he was never awarded a military occupational specialty (MOS).

8.  The applicant provides a VA doctor’s letter from the Hunter Holmes McGuire Medical Center, Richmond, VA, in which the doctor indicates the applicant 


requested she write a letter discussing the applicant’s schizophrenia and the possibility that it is service-connected.  The doctor states while it is POSSIBLE the applicant’s failure to perform was an early manifestation of schizophrenia, there are other equally plausible reasons he may not have been a good Soldier.  The doctor finally concludes with no other information indicating the presence of mental illness at the time any connection with his current condition is speculative.

9.  Department of the Army message, dated 011510Z August 1973, provided the standards and criteria for the TDP for evaluation and discharge of enlistees before 180 active duty days.  This program was implemented effective 1 September 1973 pending the revision of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel).

10.  The TDP was designed to enable commanders to expeditiously discharge the individual who lacked the necessary motivation, discipline, ability, or aptitude to become a productive Soldier when this individual:  (1)  was voluntarily enlisted in the Regular Army, Army National Guard, or the Army Reserve; (2)  was in basic combat training or basic training, or in MOS training or AIT, a service school, in units, or on-job-training prior to the award of an MOS, or would have completed no more than 179 days of active duty by the date of discharge, whichever occurred earlier; or (3)  had demonstrated that he or she was not qualified for retention for one or more of the following reasons:  (a)  could not or would not adapt socially or emotionally to military life; (b)  could not meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, or motivation; or (c)  did not meet the moral, mental, or physical standards for enlistment including disqualifying drug use in accordance with Army Regulation 601-210 (Active and Reserve Components Enlistment Program).

11.  The TDP did not apply to personnel who should have been eliminated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph  13-5a for unfitness, or chapter 14 for fraudulent enlistment, or had demonstrated character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service.  Individuals discharged under the authority of this message were given an honorable discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that the reason for his discharge should be more specific has been carefully considered.  However, the DD Form 214 issued to the applicant clearly identifies the authority for his discharge in item 6 and the narrative reason for his separation as TDP in item 27.  As a result, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2.  Further, there is no medical evidence in the record or provided by the applicant that indicates he suffered from a disabling mental or physical condition at the time of his separation that would have disqualified him from further service or supported his separation processing through medical channels.  

3.  Additionally, the TDP separation policy in effect at the time prohibited the separation of members who had demonstrated character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service.  As a result, it is clear the applicant’s separation processing was not the result of an early manifestation of his later diagnosed schizophrenia.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support any speculation this condition was a primary factor in his separation.  

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.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X____  ____X____  ___X_____  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.



      ____________X____________
               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)                                         AR20100018446



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100018446



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1