IN THE CASE OF:  

BOARD DATE:  22 February 2022

DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20210010700


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  

*	Reconsideration of his previous request to change his Reentry (RE) Code from 
RE-4 to a more favorable RE Code
*	As a new issue, change of his narrative reason for separation
*	Personal appearance before the Board

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 
DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)

FACTS:

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 AR20190005886 on 12 March 2020.

2. The applicant request his RE Code to be changed from RE-4 to RE-1. He also 
requests a change in his narrative reason for separation be changed to Secretarial 
Authority. 

3. On 5 October 2015, he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 5 years. The 
applicant's enlisted record brief (ERB) shows he completed one station unit training on 
16 October 2015 for the military occupational specialty (MOS) of 11B (Infantryman). 

4. On 23 November 2016, an Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment was 
completed for the applicant and shows:

	a. The applicant had been involved in an incident that caused him to be injured. He 
was intoxicated to the point that he had no recollection of the incident. 

	b. The applicant's performance had been rated as good and his behavior was rated 
as fair. 

	c. The applicant was suspected to have an alcohol and/or other drug problem. 
	d. The applicant was to be enrolled in ASAP for group and individual treatment. His 
command was going to issue him a no drinking order. 

5. The applicant received Developmental Counseling Forms on:

	a. 18 December 2016, for becoming intoxicated to the point of belligerence. He was 
escorted out of the bar by security. The applicant became sick to the point that an 
ambulance was called for him. The applicant agreed with the counseling and signed the 
form. 

	b. 24 March 2017, to inform the applicant he was being recommended for a 
separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge for failing to adhere 
to the terms of his enrollment in ASAP. The applicant had knowingly consumed alcohol 
in violation of the terms of his ASAP enrollment. When asked why he consumed alcohol 
he stated he had decided to disregard the consequences of the violation. The applicant 
agreed with the counseling and signed the form.

	c. 27 March 2017, to inform him the company intended to initiate a bar to continued 
service on the applicant due to his failure in the ASAP program. The applicant agreed 
with the counseling and signed the form.  

	d. 27 April 2017, regarding his ASAP failure and the initiation of separation due to 
his failure. The second page of the counseling form was not available for the Board's 
consideration. 

6. On 23 March 2017, a Sworn Statement was completed by a First Lieutenant (1LT), 
which states on 21 March 2017, he was informed two of his Soldiers, while serving on a 
detail, consumed alcohol on 16 March 2017. Knowing the Soldiers were not supposed 
to be consuming alcohol due to their prior ASAP enrollments, he brought the private first 
class (PFC) and applicant into his office to ask them if they had consumed alcohol, 
while on duty. They both said they had. 

7. On 28 April 2017, a US European Command Waiver Request was completed for the 
applicant and shows the applicant was command referred to ASAP for a drunken fight. 
He underwent counseling and completed the addiction medicine intensive outpatient 
program. He had no alcohol related issues since, including over four day weekends. 
The applicant had enough medication to last through his six month deployment. 

8. On 28 March 2017, a Sergeant First Class (SFC) wrote a letter of support for the 
applicant which states, in effect:

	a. He was writing on behalf of the applicant. The SFC attended the 6 week AMIOP 
course with the applicant, he was in the SFC's small group and also lived in close 
quarters with the SFC. The SFC felt he had first-hand knowledge of the applicant's drive 
to be sober and further his military service.

	b. The applicant was very motivated to be attending the course and was a natural 
leader to those in the course. He never complained about long days or details, he was 
always on time and was always the first Solder at the gym and the last to leave. He 
expressed a desire to go to Ranger school and Special Forces selection both of which 
the SFC felt he could have accomplished, if he continued his military service and his 
sobriety. The applicant's path would not be easy as the SFC had come to understand 
alcoholism very well, an addiction they shared but the SFC believed the applicant had 
the ability to overcome his drinking issues and serve successfully in the Army. The SFC 
noticed many of the service members who attended the AMIOP course looked to the 
applicant for advice and followed his example and latched to his positive attitude about 
sobriety, the program, and the military. The applicant often spoke of his unit and his 
team with great pride and looked forward to rejoining his team and deploy to Poland.

	c. The SFC expressed that he felt strongly that the applicant should continue his 
service to our country and he would be a valuable asset to his current and future units. 

9. On 3 April 2017, a psychotherapist wrote a memorandum of support for the applicant, 
which states, in effect:

	a. The applicant was being separated under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 
635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 9 ASAP Failure to 
rehabilitate. The psychotherapist believed there were extenuating circumstances that 
should have been considered in the matter.

	b. The applicant was enrolled in ASAP in November 2016 and remained sober for 
one month. At that time, the psychotherapist's recommendation or treatment was to 
refer the applicant to AMIOP (Addictions Medicine Intensive Outpatient Program) for 
intensive outpatient treatment, as the applicant met the criteria for that level of care. It 
was felt by the applicant and his chain of command that they could try a lower level of 
care initially to see if he could be successful. The applicant was enrolled in outpatient 
treatment and during that time, he participated fully in the program and contributed 
greatly in the group setting.

	c. In December 2016, the applicant relapsed and all agreed to a higher level of care 
which was AMIOP. He attended the AMIOP Program from 23 January through 3 March 
2017. He was released from the program, after having completed it successfully.

	d. The recommendation, upon his discharge from AMIOP, was to continue to remain 
sober, abstaining from all alcohol, continuing with changing his people, place, and 
things (making sober friends, avoiding all establishments where alcohol was served).

	e. On 16 March 2017, after being discharged from the Intensive Outpatient Program 
less than two weeks, the applicant was instructed to provide Security for his unit's ball 
held at which would be in violation of his discharge recommendations as alcohol was 
being served at this event. During the course of the evening, the applicant was 
instructed to tend the bar and sell bottles of wine and champagne, a further violation of 
his discharge recommendations. This created an extremely stressful and conflicting 
situation for him and he relapsed by drinking a sip of champagne. The 
noncommissioned officer (NCO) in charge that was there that evening observed the 
applicant in the act of drinking said champagne and allowed him to continue working the 
bar that evening even though the applicant had relapsed.

	f. As a result of this relapse, the applicant's chain of command was notified and a 
request for an ASAP Failure to Rehabilitate Memorandum was requested and provided; 
however, under these extenuating circumstances, it is felt the applicant was not 
adequately protected from harm, and the discharge recommendations were not 
followed, which placed him in a compromising position to relapse. 

	g. Even in the light of the separation process, the applicant continued to go to ASAP 
for treatment, continued to communicate with his support group, and attended 
alcoholics anonymous (AA) meetings on post and online. The applicant expressed a 
sincere desire to continue with his career in the Army. As such, the psychotherapist fully 
support him being retained in the Army. 

10. On 10 April 2017, the applicant underwent a Report of Mental Status Evaluation, 
which shows he was cleared for separation under Chapter 9. He required temporary 
duty limitations and would likely require behavioral health treatment to be restored to full 
duty. He was diagnosed with alcohol dependence. 

11. On 26 April 2017, a memorandum subject: ASAP Synopsis of 
Treatment/Rehabilitation Failure was completed and states, in effect:

	a. On 23 November 2016, the applicant was command referred to ASAP for an 
alcohol related incident (which caused him to sustain bodily injury, while under the 
influence). He completed a comprehensive bio-psycho-social evaluation and met the 
criteria for alcohol dependence and was enrolled in ASAP. Enrollment also included 
psycho-education intervention and he attended 12-hour Alcohol and Drug Prevention 
Class "Prime for Life".

	b. On or about 28 December 2016, the command notified ASAP that the applicant 
had relapsed, during treatment and drank during the Christmas Leave. An RTM was 
held and it was determined that the applicant qualified for a higher level of care, the 
AMIOP program. Command was in agreement with ASAP's decision and the applicant 
was admitted into the AMIOP program on 23 January 2017 and completed treatment 
successfully on 3 March 2017.

	c. On 21 March 2017, the applicant, two weeks after discharge from AMIOP was 
working the military ball selling drinks and relapsed a second time, during the course of 
his detail. The applicant's chain of command notified ASAP of the incident.

	d. Due to the circumstances, the applicant was considered an ASAP Rehabilitation 
Failure based on the recommendations of his chain of command and current Army 
Directive and Regulation. 

12. On 27 April 2017, a Report to Suspend Favorable Personnel Actions (FLAG) was 
completed on the applicant for involuntary separation. 

13. On 2 May 2017, the applicant underwent a Report of Medical Examination, which 
shows the applicant was qualified for service.

14. On 15 July 2017, the applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant that 
he was initiating separation actions against him under the provisions of Army 
Regulation, chapter 9, alcohol or other drug abuse rehabilitation failure.  

15. The applicant acknowledged he had been notified of the pending separation action, 
advised by his consulting counsel of the basis for the contemplated action against him, 
and elected to submit a statement in his own behalf, which states, in effect:

	a. He was writing the statement for himself to formally apologize with taking the 
approval authority's time to review his separation packet. 

	b. His time in the Army might be cut short and he wished it wouldn't happen the way 
it was, but he did this to himself fulling knowing the consequences. As a Soldier, there is 
no excuse. He was not mission ready, disregarded his values, and showed the exact 
opposite of what his country expected him to be. He didn't know how to put it without 
contradicting his actions, but he loved what he did as an 11B. 

	c. Allied Spirt V was a great example to get good training and to show his unit what 
he was capable of. Although he was "killed" before he made it into the city, he fought 
until the end using his M249, and when that was out of ammo, he grabbed his TC's and 
drivers M4s to continue the fight. 

	d. Right after Allied Spirit V, he volunteered for the Expert Infantryman Badge. Tired 
and worn out, he still wanted to try and improve himself. He had a lust for knowledge 
and needed to be proficient in his job. It was just his nature to strive to be better.

	e. He had schools that he wanted to attend, while in the service, Ranger, Air Assault, 
Sniper, and one day he hoped to drop a packet for Special Forces. 

	f. The Army granted him so many opportunities, opened doors that he never thought 
was possible before enlisting. He could go on forever about what he did, learned, and 
experienced his short time in the Army, but it all meant nothing if he continued to not be 
a useful asset to his unit most importantly keeping himself well to do those things.

	g. He self-enrolled in ASAP, after and incident that left him scared. He was drunk 
and disorderly and picked a fight with his friend. They handled it on their level so he 
wouldn't get in serious trouble and hurt a stranger. He lied to his 1LT about it when he 
was asked what happened. The applicant lied to the 1LT multiple times, when he 
confronted the applicant over and over. Finally, he told the 1LT what really happened 
and not the excuse that he fell when he was drunk. 

	h. Lying to an officer is breaking the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Giving the 
applicant a chance, the 1LT did not push forward with nonjudicial punishment and the 
applicant referred himself to ASAP the next day knowing that his alcohol use was 
causing a problem.

	i. His command was on board with him going to ASAP and they were willing to go to 
any lengths to help him seek treatment. His ASAP counselor diagnosed him with severe 
alcohol dependency and it was recommended he go to AMOIP. This program was an 
intensive outpatient program for six weeks. 

	j. He declined to go, because they had more training coming up and he did not want 
to miss out on any of it. A month passed and he was doing excellent until his Christmas 
leave cam up and he decided to stay in Germany. 

	k. He went out on 18 December 2015, right after he obtained his Schutzenshnur 
Badge to celebrate. He doesn't remember anything from that night except waking up in 
the hospital. There were no police reports taken. He immediately called his chain of 
command to inform them what happened His 1LT was about to go and pick him up, that 
when he knew he needed to seek further help. 

	l. He informed his ASAP counselor what had happened and they started the 
paperwork for AMOIP. Once again, his unit was on board in helping him especially his 
company commander. 

	m. His company commander is the one who taught the applicant that he needed to 
be well with himself first in order to be a Soldier. He left for AMOIP on 28 January 2017 
and learned a lot about who he was deep inside and what he valued. His counselor 
helped him find things that he didn't know were bother him for a long time.

	n. With his upcoming deployment to Poland, he couldn’t wait to return to his unit. On 
3 March 2017, he graduated from AMOIP and was ready to get back to his life as an 
11B. That following week, he was informed he would not be deploying with his unit to 
Poland. He was trying everything in his power to go, bothering his command asking 
what he could do to go. He did not want to stay behind, that is not who he is. 

	o. The brigade ball was approaching and he was placed on the security detail for it. 
He was in charge of selling wine and champagne for the squadron. Sometime during 
the night, he got down that he couldn't deploy. In the mist of all this, there was a bottle 
that someone left open on the counter and it had been there for a long time. He thought 
about taking a sip, at the same time hoping the person who bought it would come back 
to get it before he took a sip. He finally made the decision to take a sip. 

	p. As he had the bottle to his lips and drank, a staff sergeant (SSG) talked to him 
about what he had done. He felt ashamed of the work he had ruined and was out of 
focus the whole night. His sobriety was ruined by one mistake and now his career was 
ruined.

	q. The applicant could not undo or apologize anymore for what he'd already 
explained. All he knew was that he needed the Army. He caused his family enough pain 
throughout his life. 

	r. He cam from Long Island, New York, where his mother worked two jobs her whole 
life after having four sons to support. His father was diagnosed with cancer and could 
not work, so money got really tight for them. He could not return for various reason.

	s. He received a waiver clearing him to deploy to Poland. He was willing and ready 
to go, at any time, to help out his squadron. He would also take any other punishment, 
besides separation, to stay in the Army. 

16.  On 5 July 2017, the applicant's immediate commander initiated separation action 
against the applicant under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 9, for Alcohol or 
Drug Abuse Rehabilitation Failure. The reasons for the proposed action are:  On 23 
November 2016, he was command referred to ASAP for an alcohol related incident. He 
completed a comprehensive bio-psycho-social evaluation, met DSM JV criteria for an 
Alcohol Dependence and was subsequently enrolled in ASAP, an ASAM Level l.0 
Outpatient program with command concurrence. On 28 December 2016, his command 
notified ASAP that he had relapsed during treatment and drank during Christmas Leave. 
An RTM was held and it was determined that he qualified for a higher level of treatment 
and were admitted into the AMIOP program on 23 January 2017 and completed 
treatment successfully on 3 March 2017.  On 21 March 2017, he relapsed again at a 
military ball by consuming alcohol. Due to all the circumstances above he was 
determined to be an ASAP failure.
16. The applicant's chain of command recommended approval of the separation and on 
10 July 2017, the appropriate commander approved the separation and directed he be 
issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.  

17. On 2 August 2017, he was discharged accordingly.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was honorably discharged in 
accordance with chapter 9 of AR 635-200. He completed 1 year, 9 months, and 28 days 
of net active service this period. His DD Form 214 shows he was assigned Separation 
Code JPD and RE Code 4. He was awarded or authorized the National Defense 
Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, and Army Service Ribbon.

18. On 29 December 2020, the Board considered his application to have his RE Code 
upgraded from RE-4 to RE-1, so he can reenlist in the military and that the Board grant 
him a medical retirement, a temporary disability retirement, or a regular military 
retirement. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board 
found that relief was not warranted. 

	a.  The Board considered the applicant’s statement, his record and length of service, 
the frequency and nature of his misconduct, his enrollment in ASAP and subsequent 
release from the program as a rehabilitation failure and the reason for his separation.  
The Board found insufficient evidence of in-service mitigation to overcome the reason 
for the applicant’s separation or to reverse the determination of his program failure.  The 
Board found that the RE Code was appropriate based on the reason for his discharge.  

	b.  The Board found no evidence, and the applicant did not provide evidence, to 
show that the applicant had a condition that failed to meet medical retention standards, 
thus there is no reason to consider a medical separation or retirement.  The applicant 
had insufficient service to meet requirements for a military retirement.  Based on a 
preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the reason and RE Code the 
applicant received upon separation was not in error or unjust.

19. The applicant requests a change of his narrative reason for discharge to show his 
separation and change of his RE code. 

	a. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations- Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 
9, Alcohol or Other Drug Abuse Rehabilitation Failure, provided the authority and 
outlined the procedures for discharging enlisted personnel based on alcohol or other 
drug(s) abuse failure.  Paragraph 9-2a and subparagraph 9-2a(1), provided a member 
who is enrolled in 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 when there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation 
efforts are no longer practical.  An honorable or under honorable conditions discharge 
were appropriate for chapter 9.
	b. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority 
for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5 establishes policy and prescribes 
procedures for separating members for Secretarial authority convenience of the 
government.  Separation under this paragraph is the prerogative of the Secretary of the 
Army.  Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom 
delegated.  Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and 
early separation is clearly in the best interest of the Army.  Separations under this 
paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the 
Secretary’s approved designee as announced in updated memorandums.
	c. Army Regulation 635-8 prescribes policies and procedures for the completion of 
the DD Form 214.  It cites Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator 
(SPD) Codes) as the source for entries in item 28 of the DD Form 214.  

	d. Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at the time, stated Soldiers separated under 
the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200 were assigned the SPD "JPC" on 
the DD Form 214; the required entry in item 28 of the DD Form 214 was "Drug, 
Rehabilitation Failure."

	e. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Program Designator Code/Reentry Code 
Cross Reference Table) shows an SPD of JPC had a RE Code of 4. 

	f. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) states an applicant is not entitled to a hearing 
before the ABCMR.  Hearings may be authorized by a panel of the ABCMR or by the 
Director of the ABCMR. 

BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully 
considered.  In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and 
equitable decision.  As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to 
serve the interest of equity and justice in this case.

2.  After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that 
relief was not warranted. Board members noted that the applicant was discharged for 
being an alcohol rehabilitation failure. Absent him failing rehabilitation, there would have 
been no fundamental reason to separate him. The reason for his separation was his 
alcohol rehabilitation failure which is correctly listed on his DD Form 214. Such 
discharge carries a Separation Code of JPC, which has a corresponding RE Code of 4. 
Board members found no error or injustice. 

BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

XX:	XX:	XX:	DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  Regarding the reason for separation, 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.

2.  Regarding the Reentry Code, 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set 
forth in Docket Number AR20190005886 on 12 March 2020.

		  
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, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of 
military records must be filed within 3 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 3-year statute 
of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  

2. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for 
correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR.  
The ABCMR may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or request additional evidence or 
opinions.  Additionally, it states in paragraph 2-11 that applicants do not have a right to 
a hearing before the ABCMR.  The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing 
whenever justice requires.
3. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations- Enlisted Personnel), Chapter 9, 
Alcohol or Other Drug Abuse Rehabilitation Failure, provided the authority and outlined 
the procedures for discharging enlisted personnel based on alcohol or other drug(s) 
abuse failure.  Paragraph 9-2a and subparagraph 9-2a(1), provided a member who is 
enrolled in 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 when 
there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no 
longer practical.  An honorable or under honorable conditions discharge were 
appropriate for chapter 9.
4. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for 
the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 5 establishes policy and prescribes 
procedures for separating members for Secretarial authority convenience of the 
government.  Separation under this paragraph is the prerogative of the Secretary of the 
Army.  Secretarial plenary separation authority is exercised sparingly and seldom 
delegated.  Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and 
early separation is clearly in the best interest of the Army.  Separations under this 
paragraph are effective only if approved in writing by the Secretary of the Army or the 
Secretary’s approved designee as announced in updated memorandums.
5. Army Regulation 635-8 prescribes policies and procedures for the completion of the 
DD Form 214.  It cites Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) 
Codes) as the source for entries in item 28 of the DD Form 214.  

6. Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at the time, stated Soldiers separated under the 
provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200 were assigned the SPD "JPC" on the 
DD Form 214; the required entry in item 28 of the DD Form 214 was "Drug, 
Rehabilitation Failure."
7. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Program Designator Code/Reentry Code Cross 
Reference Table) shows an SPD of JPC had a RE Code of 4. 

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	  AR20210010700


1
ARMY BOARD OF CORRECTIONS OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1