IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 July 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080006185 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 the Separation Program Designator (SPD) Code be removed from his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation From Active Duty) with an effective date of 17 June 1976. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that a SPD code is not required for an honorable discharge. He further states the SPD code causes discrimination. 3. The applicant provides no additional evidence or official documentation 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 military personnel record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 February 1975 for a period of 3 years. He successfully completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty 12B (Combat Engineer). 3. On 26 February 1976, the applicant was mandatorily referred to the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (CDAAC) for counseling and rehabilitation for heroin use. 4. On 7 May 1976, a progress report from the CDAAC recommended the applicant be considered a rehabilitation failure and that he be processed for administrative discharge. 5. On 12 May 1976, the applicant's commander notified him that action was being taken to discharge him for unsuitability. 6. On 14 May 1976, the applicant's commander recommended that the applicant be eliminated before his expiration term of service for personal abuse of drugs and illegal, wrongful, and improper use of a control substance, to wit: morphine. 7. On 7 June 1976, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation to discharge the applicant and directed that he be issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate. 8. On 17 June 1976, the applicant was discharged by reason of unsuitability for drug abuse and assigned the SPD code "JMM." The SPD code "JMM" is entered in Item 9c (Authority and Reason) of the applicant's DD Form 214. He had completed 1 year, 4 months, and 7 days of active service that was characterized as honorable. 9. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes), then in effect, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons. The SPD code was used in statistical accounting to represent the reason for separation. The regulation showed that the SPD code “JMM,” as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214, specifies the narrative reason for discharge as “Unsuitability - drug abuse.” 10. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), then in effect, provided, in pertinent part, that an SPD code would be entered in Item 9c of a Soldier's DD Form 214. The Regulation further provided that the narrative reason indicated by the SPD code would not be entered on the DD Form 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends his SPD code should be removed from his DD Form 214 because he received an honorable discharge and the code causes discrimination. 2. Based on the reasons the applicant was discharged, the SPD coded entered on his DD Form 214 is correct. 3. Army Regulations required the entry of an SPD code on a DD Form 214 without regard to the characterization of service (i.e. honorable, general, etc.). Therefore, there are no provisions for removing the SPD code from the applicant's DD Form 214. 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) AR20080006185 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080006185 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1