IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 21 August 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140000405
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 the narrative reason for his discharge be changed to a more favorable reason that will afford him benefits.
2. The applicant states he is unable to receive veterans benefits because of his discharge and is currently disabled.
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 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 November 1979 for a period of 3 years, training as an armor crewman and assignment to Europe.
3. He was transferred to Fort Knox, KY to undergo one-station unit training. On 7 May 1980, the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-33 and the Trainee Discharge Program (TDP). He cited as the basis for his recommendation the applicants negative attitude toward his duties and responsibilities as a Soldier, his failure to work with his peers, avoiding work whenever possible, failure to show interest in instructions given, failure to respond to repeated counseling, inability to work without constant supervision, and his expressed comments that he did not care and he wanted out of the Army.
4. The applicant declined the opportunity to make a statement in his own behalf and declined a separation physical examination. He also acknowledged he understood that due to non-completion of requisite active duty time, Veterans Administration (VA) and other benefits normally associated with completion of honorable active service would be affected and that he would not be permitted to reenter the Army for 2 years from the date of separation.
5. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on
9 May 1980 and directed the applicant be furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
6. Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 14 May 1980 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33f(2) under the TDP for marginal or non-productive service. He had served 5 months and 17 days of active service.
7. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33, in effect at the time, provided the criteria for the separation of personnel under the TDP who lacked the necessary motivation, discipline, ability, or aptitude to become a productive Soldier. It states, in pertinent part, that commanders may expeditiously discharge members of the Regular Army, Army National Guard or United States Army Reserve who have completed 179 days or less of active duty and have demonstrated that they cannot or will not adapt socially or emotionally to military life. Commanders were authorized to issue either an Honorable or General Discharge and the separation code for discharge under the TDP was "JET." The appropriate RE Code to be assigned to individuals discharged with a separation code of "JET" is a "3." Under today's standards, individuals discharged with less than 180 days of active duty service will receive a discharge with "UNCHARACTERIZED" service.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants administrative discharge was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations with no indication of any violations of the applicants rights.
2. The evidence of record shows that the type of discharge and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances and the applicant has failed to show otherwise.
3. The fact that the applicant is attempting to obtain VA benefits has been noted. However, there is no error or injustice in his case and the VA administers its program under its own regulations and policies and changing the applicants discharge solely for the purpose of qualifying for VA benefits is not within the purview of this Board.
4. Accordingly, there appears to be no basis for granting the applicants request.
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) AR20140000405
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140000405
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004887
The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to show he was discharged by reason of a physical disability that was incurred as a result of military service. On 19 November 1980, the applicant was counseled by his commander concerning his ability to participate and complete basic training. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual's medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090017470
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of the reason for his separation from an honorable discharge under the trainee discharge program (TDP) to a medical discharge. On 12 August 1980, the applicant's immediate commander advised the applicant that he intended to recommend his discharge from the Army under the provisions of paragraph 5-33 (TDP) of Army Regulation 635-200.
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 | CY2004 | 2004106626C070208
An honorable discharge was authorized for members separating under this provision. In accordance with the regulation in effect at the time, the narrative reason for separation for members separated under the provisions of paragraph 5-33f(2), Army Regulation 635-200 was “Trainee Discharge Program (TDP) Marginal or nonproductive”, as is recorded in Item 28 of the applicant’s DD Form 214. Thus, there appears to be no error or injustice related to this entry and as a result, there is an...
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 | CY2009 | 20090004063
He goes on to state that he enlisted at the age of 16 with his guardian's consent long before he departed for basic training and his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) does not reflect this information. The facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's administrative separation are not present in the available records; however, the records do contain a duly constituted DD Form 214 signed by the applicant which shows that he was honorably discharged on 1...
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 | 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 | CY2013 | 20130015966
The applicant requests, in effect, the narrative reason and separation program designator (SPD) code shown on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed to reflect that he was discharged for medical reasons so he can receive medical benefits. He advised the applicant that the final decision in his case rested with the separation authority and if his separation was approved, his service would be characterized as honorable. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100001263
On 10 July 1978, he was counseled by his unit commander and indicated that he desired a discharge. On 25 July 1978, his immediate commander advised him that he intended to recommend that he be discharged from the Army under the provisions of paragraph 5-33 (Trainee Discharge Program (TDP)) of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) by reason of inability to adapt socially or emotionally to military life. At the time he was ordered discharged, the applicant was a member of the U.S....