ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  15 July 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20180008339


APPLICANT REQUESTS: in effect, an upgrade of his under honorable conditions (general) discharge to honorable. 

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

* DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) 

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 

2.  The applicant states the discharge status has changed. 

3.  Review of the applicant’s service records shows:

	a.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 August 1978.  He served in Germany from 25 November 1980 to 17 August 1982.  He reenlisted on 7 June 1982. 

	b.  On 3 May 1983, the applicant showed up to noon formation while under the influence of alcohol.  

	c.  On 2 April 1984, at Fort Bliss, TX, the applicant was command referred for screening and subsequent enrollment in Track II (later Track III on 7 January 1985) of the Fort Bliss Army Substance Abuse and Prevention Control Program (ADAPCP).

	d.  On 15 June 1984, he accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. 

	e.  On 18 July 1984, he again accepted NJP under Article 15 for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. 
	f.  On 25 July 1985, the Clinical Director of the Fort Bliss ADAPCP provided a synopsis of the applicant's ADAPCP rehabilitation failure.  He stated the applicant was command referred to ADAPCP on 6 April 1984 for alcohol related problems.  He was enrolled in Track 3 of the treatment program on 7 January 1985. He has participated marginally in the program until this date.  His refusal to perform therapeutic tasks, negative behavior and continued drinking have contributed to his marginal participation.  His continued abuse of alcohol is a major problem in itself and interferes with his ability to correct other problems in his life and restore himself to full and effective duty functioning.  The ADAPCP staff considers SGT X____ to be a rehabilitation failure and he is alcohol dependent.  

	g.  On 25 July 1985, the applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 9 of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) for ADAPCP failure.  The immediate commander cited the specific reason as the applicant's unsatisfactory progress in ADAPCP and negative attitude towards rehabilitation.  He recommended a general discharge. 

	h.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's intent to separate him and was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation for ADAPCP failure, the type of discharge he could receive and its effect on further enlistment or reenlistment, the possible effects of this discharge, and of the procedures/rights available to him.  He elected to submit a statement in his own behalf. 

	i.  In his statement, the applicant stated he is an alcoholic, but he is also a human.  He had served proudly in the Army and took a few drinks that resulted in a bad outcome for him and his family.  He felt he had the ability and leadership to continue serving in the Army. 

	j.  Subsequent to the applicant's acknowledgement, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with chapter 9 of AR 635-200 by reason of ADAPCP rehabilitation failure.  He recommended a general discharge. He stated: 

* the applicant had been determined a rehabilitative failure from the Residential Treatment Facility (RTF), William Beaumont Army Medical Center
* he was command referred to RTF, William Beaumont, in April 1984 because of his continued alcohol related misconduct
* he enrolled in RTF Track III program in January 1985
* he completed the live-in portion of the Track III program in February 1985
* he was found intoxicated and incoherent on 4 July 1985; this incident occurred in a phone booth in the Van Horn housing area at 0340 hours; Military Police returned him to the barracks
* he arrived late for duty and was intoxicated on 19 July 1985 and was taken to WBAMC for a Blood Alcohol test (e had a high alcohol level)
* he did not have the desire or attitude to successfully complete the RTF program 

	k.  On 2 August 1985, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 9 of AR 635-200 and directed the applicant be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.  The applicant was accordingly discharged on 23 August 1985.

	l.  His DD Form 214 confirms he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 9 of AR 635-200 by reason of "alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure" with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  He completed 7 years and 14 days of creditable active military service.

4.  AR 635-200 authorized the discharge of Soldiers because of alcohol or other drug abuse.  A member who has been referred to 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.  Initiation of separation proceedings is required for Soldiers designated as alcohol/drug rehabilitation failures.  The service of Soldiers discharged under this chapter will be characterized as honorable or general.

5.  In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant's petition, his service record, and character references in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined relief is not warranted.  The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered.  The Board applied Department of Defense standards of liberal consideration to the complete evidentiary record and did not find any evidence of error, injustice, or inequity.  He did not provide character witness statements or evidence of post-service achievements for the Board to consider.  Based upon his rehabilitation failure, which resulted in his discharge, as well as the failure to accept responsibility and show remorse for the events leading to his separation, the Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization was warranted.

However, the Board did note that the applicant had a prior period of honorable service which is not currently reflected on his DD Form 214 and recommended that change be completed to more accurately depict his military service.


BOARD VOTE:
Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

X	X	X	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:	:	:	DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by adding the following additional statement to block 18 (Remarks) of his DD Form 214:  “Continuous honorable active service from 10 August 1978 until 6 June 1982.” 

2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to upgrading the characterization of his discharge.

	 
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.


REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

2.  Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  

	a.  Chapter 9 contains the authority and outlines the procedures for discharging Soldiers because of alcohol or other drug abuse.  A member who has been referred to 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.  Initiation of separation proceedings is required for Soldiers designated as alcohol/drug rehabilitation failures.  The service of Soldiers discharged under this chapter will be characterized as honorable or general under honorable conditions unless the Soldier is in an entry-level status and an uncharacterized description of service is required.

	b.  An honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. 

3.  On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations.  Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence.  BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial.  However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice.  This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority.  In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment.  Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization.

4.  AR 635-8 (Separations Processing and Documents), currently in effect, provides for the preparation and distribution of the DD Form 214.  It states for item 18 (Remarks) to Soldiers who have previously reenlisted without being issued a DD Form 214 and are separated with any characterization of service except “Honorable”, enter “Continuous Honorable Active Service from” (first day of service for which DD Form 214 was not issued) Until (date before commencement of current enlistment).

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20180008339


4


1