MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           9 November 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000043736

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Orville W. Troesch Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Lutz 		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his General Discharge (GD) be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge (HD).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was having marital problems; that after separation, he enrolled in college, but learned that he could not receive tuition benefits due to his discharge; and that his ex-wife's charges against him were unfair.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years on 10 February 1988.  Following training as a wheeled vehicle mechanic, he was assigned to Fort McClellan, Alabama, and then to Fort Richardson, Alaska.

While stationed at Fort McClellan, the applicant was enrolled in the Army's Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) in both Track I and II.  At Fort Richardson, he was command-referred to ADAPCP on 20 September 1990 as a result of an alcohol-related assault.  He was enrolled in Track III and entered an inpatient program at Sheppard Air Force Base, Texas from 29 November to 21 December 1990.  On 2 June 1991, the applicant became intoxicated following a domestic altercation.

The applicant was deemed to be an alcohol rehabilitation failure by his chain of command.  He was notified that he was being processed for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, as an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.  The applicant was advised of his rights.  He consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement on his behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended approval of the discharge action and forwarded it through command channels to the separation authority.  The separation authority, in an undated endorsement, waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a GD.

On 22 November 1991, the applicant was discharged with a GD under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 9, by reason of being an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.  He was credited with 3 years, 9 months, and 13 days of active service on his enlistment.

The applicant petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade.  The ADRB, after considering his case on 9 August 1995, denied his request.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.   Chapter 9 contains the authority and outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse.  A member who has been referred to ADAPCP for alcohol/drug abuse may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical.

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 or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  The applicant had an alcohol abuse problem and was referred to ADAPCP where he went through Tracks I, II, and III.  In spite of the Army's best efforts to rehabilitate him, the applicant reverted to alcohol abuse and was processed for separation as a rehabilitation failure.

3.  The applicant’s discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.

4.  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

__jlp____  __owt___  __bjl_____  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043736	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001109	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19911122	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C9	
DISCHARGE REASON	A69.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	110.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.