MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           10 October 2001                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001061640

	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	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		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 the reason for his discharge be changed.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was improperly discharged and offered no type of help or rehabilitation.  He became alcohol and drug dependent while in the military overseas.  He used these drugs to cope with the stress caused by his commander’s personal interference in his private life, with the stress caused by the tragic death of a fellow soldier, and with marriage problems.  He is currently being treated for mental health problems and substance abuse.  He provides his Report of Separation from Active Duty, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 June 1976.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).

On 30 January 1977, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.  

On 15 September 1977, the applicant was referred to the Community Drug and Alcohol Assistance Center (CDAAC) by his unit commander for alcohol abuse. 

On 3 October 1977, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for striking another soldier in the face with his feet.  

On 17 January 1978, a mental status evaluation found the applicant to be mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  

On 17 January 1978, a separation physical found the applicant to be qualified for separation.  He was found to be not drug dependent.

On 19 January 1978, CDAAC, in concurrence with the unit commander, recommended the applicant be considered for elimination from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16 for alcohol abuse.

On 19 January 1978, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 16, (personal abuse of alcohol or other drugs).  He indicated the applicant had received a normal 60-day 
course of treatment and was initially declared to be a rehabilitative success.  Subsequently, his actions during the follow-up phase led him to be declared a rehabilitative failure.  

The applicant acknowledged notification of the action and made no statement.

On 20 January 1978, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be given an honorable discharge.

On 25 January 1978, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 16.  He had completed 1 year,  7 months, and 19 days 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 the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) and the commander, in consultation with the rehabilitation team, determines that further rehabilitation efforts are not practical, rendering the soldier a rehabilitative failure. 

The U. S. Total Army Personnel Command has confirmed that chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 was in effect in January 1978 and could not verify that chapter 16 was ever used for drug or alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure separations

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 this requirement.

2.  The applicant’s separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was provided rehabilitation prior to his discharge.  He completed both a mental status evaluation and a physical examination prior to separation and was not found to have a mental health problem.  The narrative reason for separation was proper.

3.  The authority for the applicant’s separation appears to be in error.  Chapter 9, not chapter 16, of Army Regulation 635-200 was the proper authority to use for a drug or alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure discharge.  However, the applicant does not request a correction to the authority for his separation and so the Board will not make that correction.

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

__lls___  __jrs___  ___cg___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061640	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20011010	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.	110.02	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.