IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 02 OCTOBER 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080010666 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of his denial to upgrade his discharge to honorable. His request was submitted through his Representative in Congress. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he is providing treatment records to show proof that he was in a Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Program at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. He contends that he only said he went absent without leave (AWOL) because he was not working in his military occupational specialty (MOS) because he was trying to save his career, and he did not want to admit that he had been drunk for over a month and could not remember being AWOL. He also contends that a few months prior to going AWOL, he was recommended for a Meritorious Service Medal, and even though it was downgraded to an Army Commendation Medal it reflects his perfect service up until the time he went AWOL. He also received the Army Good Conduct Medal, the Humanitarian Service Medal, and he volunteered to be exposed to radiation while on Eniwetok Atoll in the Marshall Islands. He became an acting sergeant because he did an outstanding job running his supply room. He passed all command inspections. He was a good Soldier with a very bad drinking problem. He was advised to take a chapter 10 discharge, and being a full-blown alcoholic, he should have been in a medical facility rather than being required to make important decisions which could affect his life. Since he left the military, he is sober and he has been in treatment for his depression. Today he understands there is treatment for depression, without self-medicating with alcohol. He feels he should at least be given the opportunity to appear before the Board to answer questions. While the punishment for his offense was legal, he does not feel it was just. He is submitting supporting statements from his company commander and battalion commander. 3. The applicant provides two supporting statements and a copy of a DA Form 4466 (Patient Progress Report). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20070018147, on 20 March 2008. In this decision, it was noted that there was no evidence in the applicant's official records to show he was an alcoholic or that he entered into a drug or alcohol program. 2. The applicant provides a letter from his former company commander who indicates that he remembers the applicant's contribution to the mission because he was so young and performed at such a high level. The unit was part of the 82nd Airborne, their equipment was parachuted, most of the operations were at night, and that it was extremely difficult to maintain accountability of equipment in an airborne organization. The applicant was directly responsible for maintaining the accountability of millions of dollars worth of equipment that was flown and dropped all over the world. He was extremely creative and provided a level of supply support unequal to that in the battalion. He was promoted ahead of his peers. 3. The applicant provides a letter from his former battalion commander, who states that the applicant produced positive results and performed very well in a fast moving high intensity environment. The unit was an extremely active unit and as such all supply sergeants had very difficult jobs keeping track of equipment and enforcing supply discipline throughout the battalion. The applicant had responsibility for a significant amount of equipment totaling millions of dollars. He was an exemplary Soldier who served his unit and country with a high degree of dedication. 4. The applicant provided a copy of a Patient Progress Report showing that he was released from an alcohol treatment program on or about 28 April 1983. His counselor evaluated his progress as "good" and his commander assessed his rehabilitation as successful. He was returned to duty as a successful rehabilitation. 5. The above evidence is new and was not considered in the original decision. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions and letters of support were carefully considered; however, the evidence of record still does not show that he was a full-blown alcoholic at the time of his discharge. He provided evidence to show that he was successfully rehabilitated and was returned to duty after completing an alcohol treatment program in April 1983. 2. In addition, he provided two letters of support from his company and battalion commanders who attest to his exemplary service. Neither statement mentions that his performance was marred by overindulgence in alcohol. Rather they both claim that he was promoted ahead of his peers, although young, he was responsible and performed the duties of a more senior sergeant, and that he produced positive results. 3. Given the above, the applicant has failed to show that his performance of duty was impaired by alcohol or that his alcoholism was a mitigating factor in his period of AWOL. Even if true, the applicant had the duty to support and abide by the Army's alcohol abuse policies. By abusing alcohol, the applicant knowingly risked a military career, and the misconduct that he alleges resulted from his abuse of alcohol, diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. Further, the applicant was provided an opportunity through attendance of an alcohol rehabilitation program, and if, as he alleges, he continued to abuse alcohol after successfully completing the program, then he was fully cognizant of his actions and of the consequences of continued alcohol abuse. As such, there is no basis upon which to grant a change in the applicant's character of service. 4. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant did not submit any evidence that warrants a change in the Board's previous decision. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __XXX __ __XXX__ __XXX__ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20070018147, dated 20 March 2008. ___ XXX ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080010666 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080010666 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1