APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That the narrative reason for her separation be changed to hardship, that her reentry code to changed to “1” and that her rank be restored to Private First Class.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, joining the Army was her first experience away from home.  She soon found herself in an abusive relationship with an experienced soldier and it was not long before they started getting high.  She had a positive urinalysis, was reduced to Private E-2 and was humiliated.  By that time she had a baby.  She requested to separate due to the stress of a new family, being demoted and a bad relationship.  When she was offered a Chapter 9, honorable discharge, she jumped at it, not understanding the reality of the narrative and the reentry code.  Now she does and she can not get a good job because of it.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant’s military records show:

She was born on 17 January 1964.  She enlisted in the Regular Army on           29 September 1983.  She completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 76C (Equipment Records and Parts Specialist).

On 7 August 1985, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for wrongfully using some amount of marijuana.  Her punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-2.

A Synopsis of Rehabilitative Activities dated 7 August 1985 noted that the applicant was a self-referral to the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) for alcohol abuse.  Due to a documented history of cannabis abuse, she was enrolled in Track II for both alcohol and cannabis.  She was seen in four individual and four group counseling sessions.  She received three positive urinalyses for THC since her enrollment.  

On 12 August 1985, a mental status evaluation found the applicant mentally capable of understanding and participating in board proceedings.

On 16 August 1985, the commander initiated separation action on the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9 for drug abuse rehabilitative failure.

On 16 August 1985, the applicant acknowledged notification of the action and made no statement.
A separation physical examination was completed and the applicant found to be qualified for separation.

On 23 August 1985, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed she given an honorable discharge.

On 29 August 1985, she was honorably discharged, in pay grade E-2, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9.  She had completed 1 year, 11 months and 1 day of creditable active service and had no lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 9 provides for the discharge of members based on alcohol or other drug abuse such as the illegal, wrongful or improper use of any controlled substance, alcohol or other drug when the soldier in enrolled in ADAPCP and the commander, in consultation with the rehabilitation team, determines that further rehabilitation efforts are not practical, rendering the soldier a rehabilitative failure.  

That regulation also governs hardship discharges.  In pertinent part, it states that a hardship exists when in circumstances not involving death or disability of a member of the soldier’s immediate family, separation from the Service will materially affect the care of support of the family by alleviating undue and genuine hardship.  It also states that a soldier will not be separated because of hardship until proper disposition is made of the case if he is being processed for discharge per paragraph 5-8 or Chapter 9 or 11.

Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army  (RA) and the U.S. Army Reserve. Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes, including RA RE codes.

RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waiverable.  

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The non-judicial punishment was imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policies.  The punishment imposed was neither unjust nor disproportionate to the offense.

3.  The applicant’s separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize her rights.  She did not meet the regulatory requirements for a hardship discharge.

4.  The narrative reason for separation and the reentry code were and are correct given the Chapter under which she was separated.  The applicant signed the DD Form 214 after it was completed.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION

                        	Loren G. Harrell
					 	Director