IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:  24 January 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110011766 


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, disability separation with severance pay or retirement.

2.  He states that his enlistment exam conducted over 2 days (28 and 29 March 1974) found no disability indicators that would have held him unfit for active military duty.  Events in training for the following 3 weeks cause chronic disability and mental breakdown.  The military caused his disability and he has suffered continuously since then.  He is requesting his records be corrected to show a service-connected disability caused him to be unfit for duty.  He also stated that he will be submitting evidence pertaining to his continuous medical and mental health care since his discharge in 1974.

3.  He provides:

* Standard Form (SF) 88 (Report of Medical Examination), dated 29 March 1974
* SF 93 (Report of Medical History), dated 29 March 1974
* DD Form 4 (Enlistment Contract – Armed Forces of the United States), dated 29 March 1974
* DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record)
* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), ending on 29 April 1974
* Letter from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), dated 9 May 2011
* VA Form 21-22 (Department of Veterans Affairs – Appointed of Veterans Service Organization as Claimant’s Representative), dated 13 May 2011 

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

Counsel provides no statements, requests, or additional information in support of the applicant’s 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 military record shows that on 29 March 1974 he underwent a medical examination for enlistment in the Regular Army (RA).  No disqualifying defects or communicable diseases were noted and he was found qualified for enlistment.

3.  He enlisted in the RA, in pay grade E-1, on 29 March 1974, for 3 years.  

4.  On 15 April 1974, the applicant’s company commander initiated action to discharge the applicant under the provisions of DA Message date time group (DTG) 011510Z August 1973, Subject:  Evaluation and Discharge of Enlistees Before 180 Active Duty Days.  The company commander stated the reasons were the applicant’s demonstrated immaturity, substandard performance, and inability to accept correction classified him as unsuitable for retention in the United States Army.  He advised the applicant of his rights and the issuance of an honorable discharge.

5.  On 15 April 1974, the applicant acknowledged the proposed discharge due to non-completion of requisite active duty time.  He also acknowledged that VA and 

other benefits normally associated with completion of honorable active duty service would be affected.  He elected not to consult with counsel pertaining to the discharge procedures or make a statement in his own behalf.

6.  On 16 April 1974, the applicant was removed from training due to his severe immaturity and physical inability to perform simple required tasks.  His platoon sergeant stated:

	a.  He was unable to adequately train the other trainees since he constantly had to correct the applicant’s marching, display, physical training, and all other required tasks.  He appeared to be emotionally despondent because of the separation from his mother.  He was continually on the verge of tears and the slightest correction caused emotional trauma.  

	b.  His clumsy, uncoordinated manner and childish actions had caused a hostile attitude within his platoon.  On one occasion he refused to go to bed in his platoon for fear of a blanket party.  He would never be mature enough for duty in the United States Army.

7.  On 23 April 1974, the appropriate separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of DA Message DTG 011510Z August 1973, Subject:  Evaluation and Discharge of Enlistees Before 180 Active Duty Days, and directed the issuance of an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

8.  Accordingly, he was honorably discharged, in pay grade E-1, on 29 March 1974, under the provisions of DA Message DTG 011510Z August 1973.  He was credited with completion of 1 month and 1 day of net active service.

9.  There is no evidence he was determined medically unfit for active duty. 

10.  DA Message DTG 011510Z, dated August 1973, Subject:  Evaluation and Discharge of Enlistees Before 180 Active Duty Days, was issued by the Secretary of the Army as an interim authority for separation of personnel with less than 180 days of active duty.  This message was replaced by Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 11, and became known as the Trainee Discharge Program (TDP).  Both the message and the regulation provide for the separation of personnel in an entry-level status for unsatisfactory performance or conduct as evidenced by inability, lack of reasonable effort, or a failure to adapt to the military environment.  These provisions apply only to individuals whose separation processing is started within 180 days of entry into active duty.  


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was found medically qualified for enlistment and enlisted in the RA on 29 April 1974.  On 15 April 1974, his company commander initiated action to discharge him under the provisions of DA Message DTG 011510Z August 1973, Subject:  Evaluation and Discharge of Enlistees Before 180 Active Duty Days due to his demonstrated immaturity, substandard performance, and inability to accept correction classified him as unsuitable for retention in the United States Army.  

2.  He acknowledged the proposed discharge due to non-completion of requisite active duty time and elected not to consult with counsel pertaining to the discharge procedures or make a statement in his own behalf.  He was discharged accordingly on 29 April 1974.

3.  There is no evidence he was determined medically unfit for active duty.  He was removed from training due to his severe immaturity and physical inability to perform simple required tasks.  It was stated that he appeared to be emotionally despondent because of the separation from his mother, was continually on the verge of tears, and the slightest correction caused emotional trauma.  

4.  He was discharged for failure to complete his initial period of training.  The reason for discharge is properly noted on his DD Form 214.  He was properly discharged in accordance with pertinent regulations, with due process.  

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)                                         AR20110011766





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110011766



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1