IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 September 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140002688 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 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be corrected by annotating the entry “Interim Training Discharge” in item 27 (Remarks) and voiding his service and discharge from the National Guard. 2. The applicant states that he did not complete his 5 weeks of basic training so he was not officially a member of the Army National Guard (ARNG); he withdrew his application for enlistment because he broke his arm and did not attend training. He also states that he was denied employment because of failure to truthfully and accurately provide information related to his military service. However, the records are inaccurate and should be corrected and his ARNG service should be removed from his records. 3. The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, National Guard Bureau Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), and the withdrawal of job offer. 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) on 27 June 1978 and was transferred to Fort Jackson, South Carolina to undergo his basic training. However, the applicant was unable to understand and/or communicate in English and was honorably discharged on 7 August 1978 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 5-33 and the Trainee Discharge Program (TDP). He was issued a separation program designator (SPD) of “JEM” indicating separation under the TDP. He had served 1 month and 11 days of active service. 3. On 3 April 1986, he enlisted in the California Army National Guard (CAARNG) for a period of 8 years, training as a pioneer, and for a cash enlistment bonus. He was ordered to initial active duty for training with a report date to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri of 12 May 1987 for his one-station unit training. He failed to report as ordered and was reported as being absent without leave (AWOL). 4. On 11 June 1987, he was discharged from the CAARNG under the provisions of National Guard Regulation 600-200, paragraph 8-27u, due to being absent without authority. His service was uncharacterized. 5. DA Message DTG 011510Z August 1973, subject: Evaluation and Discharge of Enlistees before 180 Active Duty days established the TDP. It 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 RA, ARNG, 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 have been noted and appear to lack merit. His DD Form 214 correctly reflects in block 9c the authority for his discharge and an SPD Code of “JEM” which indicates that he was discharged under the TDP. Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to add an unauthorized entry of “Interim Training Discharge” to his DD Form 214. 2. The applicant enlisted in the CAARNG on 3 April 1986 and was a member of the CAARNG until he was discharged on 11 June 1987 due to being AWOL. He signed a valid enlistment contract and has provided no evidence to show that his contract was ever voided. 3. The available evidence shows he was properly discharged from the CAARNG and it is properly recorded in his official records. He has not provided any evidence to show that an error or injustice exists in his case. 4. Therefore, in the absence of such evidence, 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) AR20140002688 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140002688 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1