MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  10 October 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2001058563

	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. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Joe R. Schroeder		Member	
	Mr. Charles Gainor		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 be upgraded to honorable and that the reason for his discharge as a drug abuse-rehabilitation failure be removed.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had one positive drug screen and never participated in any drug rehabilitation program.  His general discharge was inequitable because of one isolated incident in 36 months of service.

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

He enlisted and entered active duty on 30 June 1980.  While still in training he was punished twice under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for assault.  His punishments included a fine, restriction with extra duty, and reduction to the pay grade of E-1.

He completed training as an air defense artillery fire control mechanic and was assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas.  The unit commander provided the applicant’s drug and alcohol history as part of his recommendation for discharge.  The commander noted that the applicant was command enrolled in the Army Drug and Alcohol Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) on 13 October 1981.  He successfully completed the Track II program on 23 March 1982.  The applicant was repeatedly counseled on his appearance, poor attitude, and problems with effective communication.

On 16 February 1983, the applicant was referred to the mental health activity based on problems with his inability to accomplish assigned tasks and learn the skills of his job.  During counseling he admitted to occasional drug use.  On 17 March 1983, the applicant was administered a routine drug test which tested positive for marijuana use.

On 22 June 1983, the applicant was declared a rehabilitative failure based on his substandard duty performance and continued abuse of drugs.  The unit commander also informed him of his recommendation for separation as a drug abuse-rehabilitation failure.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of this notification and elected not to consult with legal counsel or submit a statement on his own behalf.  On 28 June 1983, the applicant was punished under Article 15, UCMJ for wrongful use of a controlled substance.

The commander forwarded his recommendation to the separation authority who approved the applicant’s separation under honorable conditions.  Effective 19 July 1983, the applicant was separated under the authority of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9.  The narrative reason for separation was shown as drug abuse-rehabilitation failure.  He had 3 years and 20 days creditable service.

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 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.  The applicant’s records clearly show that he was counseled on his poor duty performance and had been command enrolled in ADAPCP in October 1981 for prior drug abuse.

2.  The 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.  He was afforded the opportunity to consult with counsel and submit statements in his own behalf, but he declined to do so.

3.  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.

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

__ls___  ___js___  ___cg_____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058563	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011010	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19830719	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, CH 9	
DISCHARGE REASON	A69.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.02	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.