IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  25 November 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140005125 


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, his discharge be modified to show he completed his 3-year military commitment in order to be eligible for full military benefits and 3 years of back pay and severance pay.

2.  The applicant states he was discharged without proper notification or due process.    

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement.  

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 (RA) for a 3-year term of service on 6 February 1975.
3.  The applicant's record contains a Fort Jackson (FJ) Form 8 (Evaluation for Discharge for Enlistees Before 180 Active Duty Days).  

   a.  On 19 February 1975, his chain of command's initial observation of the applicant was that he had low training scores, required constant supervision to accomplish the simplest task, did not carry his weight on details, and was slow in the performance of all assigned tasks.  He also failed to show the self-discipline and motivation required to become a productive Soldier.

   b.  On 24 February 1975, the applicant was counseled by his platoon sergeant concerning his lack of motivation.  His platoon sergeant noted the applicant did the minimum necessary to get by and only when a drill sergeant was present.  He fell out of runs and when doing physical training, he did the minimum necessary when he was capable of doing more.  The applicant was a disruptive force within his squad, always giving his squad leader a hard time.  It was further noted the applicant needed constant supervision.
   
   c.  On 4 March 1975, the applicant was counseled about his lack of motivation and attitude.  Since the counseling the applicant made no improvement.  He was counseled again on 8 March 1975 about his attitude and motivation problems.

4.  On 12 March 1975, the applicant's commander notified him he was initiating action to discharge him from the U.S. Army.  The reasons given by the commander were the applicant's attitude and lack of motivation. 

5.  The applicant acknowledged the notification of his proposed discharge and stated that he:

* did not desire to make a statement or submit a rebuttal in his behalf
* did not desire to have a separation medical examination

6.  On 20 March 1975, the discharge authority approved the applicant's discharge under the Trainee Discharge Program and directed that he be furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

7.  On 26 March 1975, the applicant was discharged.  He had completed 1 month and 21 days of active service which was characterized as honorable.  The authority for his discharge was Department of the Army Message DAPE-MPE 011510Z August 1973 – miscellaneous – general (Trainee Discharge Program).

8.  On 26 March 1975, the applicant requested and he was provided an explanation of his narrative reason for discharge.
9.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement in which he claims, in effect, that his involuntary separation was an act of discrimination.  He was unfairly and unlawfully discharged knowing he would be denied the full benefits of an honorable discharge.  The discharge was arbitrary, capricious, and totally unsupported by substantial evidence.

10.  There is no evidence in the applicant's personnel service record which shows he sought assistance from his chain of command for issues involving discrimination.

11.  A Department of the Army message, dated 011510Z August 1973, provided the standards and criteria for the evaluation and discharge of enlistees before 180 active duty days.  The Trainee Discharge Program was implemented effective 1 September 1973 pending the revision of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel).  It was designed to enable commanders to expeditiously discharge individuals who lacked the necessary motivation, discipline, ability, or aptitude to become a productive Soldier when the individual:

* was voluntarily enlisted in the RA, the Army National Guard or the U.S. Army Reserve
* was in basic training, military occupational specialty (MOS) training, or advanced individual training; in 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
* had demonstrated that he or she was not qualified for retention for one or more of the following reasons:  

* could not or would not adapt socially or emotionally to military life
* could not meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of a lack of aptitude, ability, or motivation
* 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)  

12.  The Trainee Discharge Program 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 request to, in effect, modify his discharge to show he completed his 3-year military commitment in order to be eligible for full military benefits and 3 years of back pay and severance pay has been carefully examined and found to be without merit.

2.  The applicant's contentions have been noted; however, there is insufficient evidence beyond his personal statement to support any of his contentions.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with the applicable message with no indication of procedural errors that would have jeopardized his rights.  There is ample evidence, in the form of FJ Form 8, to show the applicant could not or chose not to meet the minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of his attitude and lack of motivation.

3.  Although the applicant alleges that he was discriminated against during his military service, there is no evidence in his military records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence supporting this contention.  Additionally, there is no evidence which shows the applicant's attitude and lack of motivation was a direct result of the alleged discrimination.  

4.  Based on the available evidence it appears the applicant was properly discharged from the U.S. Army in accordance with a Department of the Army message, dated 011510Z August 1973, under the Trainee Discharge Program.    In view of the foregoing he is not entitled to the requested relief.

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)                                         AR20140005125



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140005125



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1