MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           3 April 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001054138

	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:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas Baxter 		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell 		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:  In effect, that the separation authority and narrative reason for his separation from the Army be changed.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he did not know that he was being separated for being an alcohol and/or drug abuse rehabilitation failure; that he was told that his separation would not be detrimental to him; that he is being prohibited from pursuing a law enforcement career because of his separation.

In support of his application, he submits a self-authored, 4-page letter.  In it he states that his daughter was born in 1996 with a serious heart condition; that he was transferred from Germany to the United States; that he was enrolled in the Exceptional Family Member Program; that doctors advised his wife not to work because placing their daughter in daycare could be detrimental to her health; that they could not get on-post housing; that his wife's inability to work, coupled with the cost of off-post housing created a financial strain; that all of his many problems created anxiety and tension in his marriage and life; that he got drunk one time and ended up in alcohol rehabilitation.  He states that he did not know what type of discharge he would receive, nor the reason for his separation.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 14 October 1993.  At the time of his enlistment, he was 22 years of age and married.  He rose through the enlisted ranks to Specialist (SPC)/E-4 on 1 July 1995.  On 14 July 1996, he reenlisted for another 3 years.

In June 1997, the applicant was transferred to Fort Lewis, Washington.  On 7 October 1997, he was command-referred to the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) because of an alcohol-related incident.  He was screened and enrolled in the Track II phase of ADAPCP.  Following completion of Track II, he entered Track III, a residential treatment program at Loma Point, California.  He was in Track III from 11 April 1998 to 8 May 1998.

After completing his treatment, the applicant continued to drink alcohol.  On 28 July 1998, his commander notified him that he was initiating separation action under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, for being an alcohol rehabilitation failure; the applicant acknowledged notification.  Also on 28 July 1998, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and indicated in writing that he understood that he was being separated under the provisions of chapter 9, AR 635-200.  He waived all rights and did not make a statement in his own behalf.

On 30 July 1998, the approving authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of chapter 9, AR 635-200 and directed that he be given a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).  He was discharged on 3 September 1998 with 4 years, 10 months and 20 days of creditable service and no lost time.  He had no record of trials by courts-martial, nor any record of nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking a discharge upgrade.  On 28 July 1999, the ADRB voted to upgrade his GD to an honorable discharge based upon the applicant's overall record of service.  The board did not change the reason and authority for the separation.

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 the 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.  Army policy states that an honorable or general discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service.

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 Board concurs with the findings and conclusions of the ADRB; the applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations and there is no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized the applicant's rights.  The Board notes that the applicant signed documents stating that he understood that he was being separated as an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.

3.  The Board also notes the applicant's contention that he is having difficulty obtaining employment in the law enforcement field; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

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

__wtm__  __tb_____  __jtm____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001054138	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010403	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19980903	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C9	
DISCHARGE REASON	A69.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	110.0200	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.