MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  18 June 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2002066842

	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	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Karol A. Kennedy		Chairperson	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		Member	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		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 phrase/words indicated in item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed or removed since the Army never enrolled him in an alcohol abuse rehabilitation program. 

APPLICANT STATES:  That the statement in item 28 of his DD Form 214 does not accurately represent him today.  He was rehabilitated years ago and that employers want to review his DD Form 214, as well as other agencies, and that this statement is often questioned.  He has moved on from his problems in Korea and successfully completed a rehabilitation program with the Veterans Administration (VA).

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show he enlisted on 
25 August 1982, as a food service specialist.  

On 20 July 1983, he was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being AWOL from 13 to 14 July 1983 (1 day).  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and 7 days restriction.

On 15 March 1984, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for being AWOL from 5 to 9 March 1984 (4 days).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2 and 7 days extra duty.

On 6 April 1984, the applicant was barred from reenlistment for the above offenses.

On 6 November 1984, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to go his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and 30 days restriction and extra duty.

On 7 December 1984, the Division Alcohol and Drug Control Officer (ADCO) prepared a statement to the commander, subject:  Statement of Rehabilitation Failure Regarding the applicant.  The ADCO stated that the applicant was referred on 28 August 1984, and was enrolled in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Control Program (ADAPCP) Track II on 1 September 1984 at the Casey Community Counseling Center.  His dates of attendance were 19 September, 7 and 14 October, and 28 November 1984.  His unexcused 
no show dates were 17 October and 5 November 1984, and excused no
show dates were 10 and 31 October 1984.  He was scheduled for a total of
9 appointments, 1 individual session and 8 group appointments.  On 5 December 1984, his commander rated his conduct and job performance as unsatisfactory and progress as poor and declared him a rehabilitation failure.  He continued to drink while enrolled in the ADAPCP and showed no desire or motivation to rehabilitate.
He was involved in another alcohol related incident on 3 December 1984, and at the request of the command, was declared a rehabilitation failure.  The unit commander was asked to take administrative action deemed appropriate.

The applicant underwent a mental evaluation on 28 December 1984, which determined that he could distinguish right from wrong and that he possessed sufficient mental capacity to participate in administrative or judicial proceedings.

On 29 December 1984, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ, for being AWOL from 9 to 12 December 1984 (3 days).  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1 and 30 days restriction and extra duty.

On 29 December 1984, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that action was being initiated to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.  He based 
his recommendation on the applicant’s continued abuse of alcohol while enrolled in Track II program, lack of motivation, negative attitude toward his problem, and lack of progress.

After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his rights.

The applicant underwent a separation medical examination on 2 January 1985, and was found qualified for separation.

On 3 January 1985, the unit commander submitted his recommendation to separate the applicant under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.  He stated that the applicant was referred to ADAPCP by this command on 24 August 1984, and was enrolled on 1 September 1984.  He was scheduled for a total of 9 counseling sessions and unexcusably failed to meet 2 of them.  He continued to drink while enrolled in the ADAPCP and showed no desire or motivation to rehabilitate.  On 5 December 1984, in consultation with the rehabilitation team, he determined that further rehabilitation efforts were not practical, thus rendering the applicant a rehabilitation failure.

On that same day, the separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 16 January 1985. 

There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

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 Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at that time, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation shows that the separation program designator (SPD) “JPD”, as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214, specifies the narrative reason for discharge as “Alcohol Abuse Rehabilitation Failure” and that the authority for discharge under this SPD is “Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9.”

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 evidence of record shows that the applicant was referred on 28 August 1984 and was enrolled in the ADAPCP Track II on 1 September 1984, at the Casey Community Counseling Center.  He was scheduled for a total of 
9 appointments, 1 individual session and 8 group appointments.

2.  On 5 December 1984, the applicant was declared a rehabilitation failure 
based on his unsatisfactory conduct and job performance and poor progress.  
On that same day, the commander in consultation with the rehabilitation team, determined that further rehabilitation efforts were not practical and recommended discharge under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9.

3.  The Board notes that the applicant’s narrative reason for separation of “Alcohol Abuse Rehabilitation Failure” is correct in accordance with regulations then in effect which shows he was assigned the proper SPD code of “JPD” as shown on his DD Form 214.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of item 
28 (Narrative Reason for Separation).

4.  The Board notes his contentions; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his contentions or to show that his narrative reason for separation should be changed or removed.

5.  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.

6.  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

__kk____  __ar____  ___mm____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002066842	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020618	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19850116	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .635-200, chap 9	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  191		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.