ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 18 April 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190000203 APPLICANT REQUESTS: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be ungraded to an honorable discharge. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), for the period ending 28 March 1985 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) 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 there is no reason for the alleged error or injustice, he just wanted out of the Army at the time. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 April 1980. He reenlisted on 25 February 1983. 4. The applicant's records indicate he self-referred to the Fort Eustis Counseling Center on 30 October 1984, for evaluation of alcohol abuse. 5. A DA Form 4466 (ADAPCP/Client Progress Report), dated 6 February 1985, indicates the applicant admitted himself into the Track II program. The clinical director/ counselor indicated he did not make any progress. The Alcohol and Drug Control Officer (ADCO) informed the applicant's commander that he was declared a rehabilitation failure. 6. The applicant's commander notified the applicant on 13 March 1985 that she was initiating actions to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 9, for alcohol or other drug abuse rehabilitation failure. a. The applicant acknowledged the notification with his signature. He further acknowledged that he understood the actions being taken against him and waived consultation with and representation by military legal counsel. b. He was advised that he could submit any statements he desired in his own behalf. His election shows he did not intend to submit a statement in his behalf. c. He acknowledged he understood that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if he received a general discharge. Having been advised of his rights of his contemplated separation and its effects, the rights available to him and the effects of a waiver of his right, he made the choice in the foregoing statement. 7. The applicant's commander formally recommended the applicant's separation from service on 21 March 1985, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, by reason of alcohol abuse. The separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 25 March 1985. 8. The applicant was discharged on 28 March 1985, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, by reason of alcohol abuse – rehabilitative failure. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was credited with completing 4 year and 11 months of net active service and his service was characterized as under honorable conditions. His DD Form 214 further shows in: a. Item 18 (Remarks) – "Immediate reenlistment this period 830225 - 860224" b. Item 23 (Type of Separation) – "Discharge" c. Item 24 (Character of Service) – "Under Honorable Conditions (General)" d. Item 25 (Separation Authority) – "[Army Regulation] AR 635-200, Chapter 9" e. Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) – "Alcohol abuse – rehabilitative failure" 9. Army Regulation 635-200 is the governing Army regulation for administrative separations. 10. The Board should consider the applicant's statement in accordance with the published equity, injustice, and clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to grant relief. 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 the record, the Board agreed that the applicant's discharge characterization was warranted as a result of his behaviors. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 6/19/2019 X X CHAIRPERSON X 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): A review of the applicant's record shows his DD Form 214, for the period ending 28 March 1985, is missing important entries that affect his eligibility for post-service benefits. As a result, amend item 18 (Remarks) of the DD Form 214 by: a. deleting the entry "Immediate reenlistment this period: 830225 – 860224"; and b. adding the following entries: * IMMEDIATE REENLISTMENT THIS PERIOD: 800429 – 830225 * SOLDIER HAS COMPLETED FIRST FULL TERM OF SERVICE * CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 800429 UNTIL 830225 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 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 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. Paragraph 3-7a provides that 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. b. Paragraph 3-7b provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. 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 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. 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 entry-level status and an uncharacterized description of service is required. 3. The Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records on 25 July 2018, regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial forum. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds. a. 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, Boards 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. b. 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS//