IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 August 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100008467 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, change of the reason for separation to physical disability due to depression. 2. The applicant states he was not treated fairly. The job he was required to do made him feel like a nobody. It was easier to discharge him rather than to treat him for depression. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty). 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 12 October 1976. He completed basic combat training with a special training company on 3 February 1977; however, he did not complete advanced individual training. 3. On 2 March 1977 the applicant was notified of initiated separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 5 (Trainee Discharge Program (TDP)) because he could not adjust socially or emotionally to military life and he could not meet military standards for aptitude and ability. 4. The applicant acknowledged the notification and indicated that he did not desire to make a statement in his own behalf or offer a rebuttal. He further indicated that he did not desire a final physical examination. 5. Separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 5 was recommended. The intermediate commander recommended discharge and the separation authority approved the separation action. 6. On 23 March 1977 the applicant was so separated. He had completed 5 months and 12 days of creditable active service. 7. No medical records were available for review. 8. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the Army. Paragraph 5-39 of this regulation, in effect at the time, governed the TDP. This program provided for the separation of service members who lacked the necessary motivation, discipline, ability, or aptitude to become productive Soldiers or have failed to respond to formal counseling. The regulation essentially requires that the service member must have voluntarily enlisted; must be in basic or advanced individual training, on the job, or service school training prior to award of a military occupational specialty and must not have completed more than 179 days of active on their current enlistment by the date of separation. The regulation provided that Soldiers may be separated when they have demonstrated that they are not qualified for retention due to failure to adapt socially or emotionally to military life; cannot meet minimum standards prescribed for successful completion of training because of lack of aptitude, ability, motivation, or self-discipline; or have demonstrated character and behavior characteristics not compatible with satisfactory continued service. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant states he was not treated fairly. The job he was required to do made him feel like a nobody. It was easier to discharge him rather than treat him for depression. 2. There is no evidence of record and the applicant did not provide any evidence to substantiate his claim that military authorities were aware of the type or extent of any mental health problem. In fact, he did not desire a final medical examination during his separation processing. 3. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case. 4. In view of the foregoing there is no basis for granting the applicant's 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) AR20100008467 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR201000