IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 25 November 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140004802
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 that his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) be corrected to show he was discharged by reason of physical disability.
2. The applicant states, in effect, his DD Form 214 shows an incorrect narrative reason for separation and he desires to have it reflect that he was discharged by reason of physical disability.
3. The applicant provides a two-page letter explaining his application and copies of documents from his medical records.
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 26 September 1977 for a period of 3 years. He was transferred to Fort Dix, New Jersey to undergo his basic training.
3. On 21 October 1977, the applicant underwent a psychiatric examination and the examining psychologist opined that the applicant presents as being an extremely angry, hostile, and aggressive young man who openly states prejudicial feelings towards other racial groups. He also states that he will not stay in the service and that he will likely do bodily harm to various permanent party personnel if he is around much longer. He opined that the applicant was a high absent without leave (AWOL) risk, aggressive, and disruptive to the unit if efforts are made to retain him. He further opined that the applicant was not likely to benefit within a reasonable period of time from further training, transfer, or treatment.
4. On 28 October 1977, the applicants commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-39 and the Trainee Discharge Program (TDP). He cited as the basis for his recommendation the applicants poor attitude and lack of motivation, self pity, and having everything his way. He further stated that he had an extremely poor attitude and that he was not man enough to complete basic combat training and that more time was spent on the applicant than any other trainee. Additionally, the applicant had repeatedly stated a strong desire to be discharged.
5. The applicant declined counsel, elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf, and he declined a separation physical examination.
6. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on
2 November 1977.
7. Accordingly, he was honorably discharged on 10 November 1977 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-39 and the TDP. He was issued a separation code of JFM which indicates his separation under paragraph 5-39 and the TDP. He had served 1 month and 15 days of active service.
8. DA Message date time group 011510Z August 1973, subject: Evaluation and Discharge of Enlistees before 180 Active Duty days established the TDP, 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 U.S. 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.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's contentions that he should have received a disability discharge have been noted; however, they are not supported by either the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record. He was properly notified of the commander's intent to recommend separation and he waived all of his rights and elected not to submit matters in his own behalf.
2. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no violations or procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons were appropriate considering all of the available facts of the case.
3. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, there appears to be no basis to grant his 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) AR20140004802
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140004802
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004335C070206
Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. 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. Evidence of record shows the applicant declined a separation physical examination two months later...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028535
The applicant requests correction of item 9c (Authority and Reason) of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to show his discharge was based on medical issues. A Trainee Discharge Program (TDP) Counseling Form shows he was counseled by a noncommissioned officer (NCO) on three occasions during the period 5-7 May 1977. In this statement, the NCO stated the applicant was disrespectful and would not attempt to train.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004957C070205
Evidence of record shows the applicant declined a separation physical examination three months later on 7 June 1977. There is also no evidence of record to show he was ever medically unfit to perform his duties. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error now under consideration on 16 June 1977; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error expired on 15 June 1980.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007884
The applicant requests correction of his records to reflect the correct dates of his active duty service. On 15 December 1977, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that action was being initiated to separate him under the provisions of the Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separation - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-39 (Trainee Discharge Program (TDP)). There is no evidence in the available records and the applicant did not provide any documentation showing that he served on...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000015
The applicant states that upon his release from jail, his chain of command offered that he could restart basic training or receive an honorable discharge. On 16 April 1980, his company commander informed him he was initiating action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-33, the TDP, with an honorable discharge. The evidence of record confirms he was discharged under the TDP due to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003276
The applicant requests correction of his records to show he was discharged for medical reasons and correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) for the period ending 6 May 1977 to show his separation program designator (SPD) code as "SFJ" instead of "JEM." Army Regulation 635-5-1 provides that SPD code "SFJ" pertains to enlisted Soldiers discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-40 (Personnel Separations-Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017270
The applicant submitted a copy of a DA Form 2496, dated 9 December 1976, in which the immediate commander requested and was granted a waiver of the applicants physical test portion of his basic combat training due to a temporary physical profile that was awarded on 24 November 1976 for a period of 21 days for a dislocated knee cap and that the applicant was cleared to ship. On 10 February 1977, the applicants unit commander notified the applicant that he was initiating action to discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110022340
In this form an Army medical official stated, "the enlisted member should be considered for discharge and indicated a Mental Hygiene evaluation would soon follow, along with the necessary TDP paperwork. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33 (TDP ) in effect at the time, states that the TDP program provides that commanders may expeditiously separate members who lack the necessary motivation, discipline, ability, or aptitude to become a productive soldier when these individuals were...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015912
He should have been sent to a medical board and a granted a medical discharge. The objectives of standards was to ensure all Soldiers were physically qualified to perform their duties in a reasonable manner, medical retention qualification standards had been established in Army Regulation 40501 (Standards of Medical Fitness), chapter 3. His military records also contain no evidence which would entitle him to a medical discharge.
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...