MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           24 October 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002076917

	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. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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:  In effect, that his general discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he feels he should not have been separated from the Army but if he had to go he did not deserve a general discharge.  His commander did not like him and tried everything until he got him on the rehabilitation failure and he had never gone through any rehabilitation.  His record should have spoken for itself.  He provides no supporting evidence.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 April 1977.  

The applicant's Personnel Qualification Record, DA Form 2-1, item 18 shows that he was promoted to Sergeant, E-5 on 10 December 1978.

A Telephone or Verbal Conversation Record, DA Form 751, dated 9 December 1982 notes that the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) revealed he received a field grade Article 15 on 19 March 1979 for operating a vehicle while drunk.  He appealed the punishment of reduction to pay grade E-4 and the appeal was denied.  His DA Form 2-1, item 18  shows he was reduced to Specialist Four, E-4 on 13 April 1979.  The same DA Form 751 notes his OMPF revealed he received an Article 15 on 22 May 1979 for failure to repair and disobeying a lawful order.  He was found in a gasthaus, clothed in fatigues, drinking during duty hours.  He did not stop drinking or vacate the premises when ordered to do so.  He received a suspended reduction to pay grade E-3.

On 9 December 1981, the applicant received a letter of reprimand for being present in the company billets in an inebriated state.  The applicant elected not to make a statement.  The letter was filed in Military Personnel Records Jacket, DA Form 201.

On 4 May 1982, the applicant's commander was notified that the applicant had a second recorded offense of a dishonored check. 

On 6 July 1982, the applicant was stopped by military police for driving under the influence.  On 7 July 1982, he was entered in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP).

On 8 July 1982, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for disobeying a lawful command to report to work and stay there in case he was needed and for operating a passenger car while drunk and in a reckless manner.  His punishment was a reduction to pay grade E-5 and a forfeiture of $200.00 pay for 2 months.  

On 6 December 1982, the applicant was stopped by local police for erratic driving.  He submitted to an intoxilyzer test, results .25%.  He appeared in court, pleaded not guilty, and was released on bond with a 22 December 1982 court date.  

A Rehabilitation Failure Statement dated 6 December 1982 and signed by the Social Service Assistant and the Deputy Alcohol and Drug Coordinator noted that, in consultation with the applicant's commanding officer, it was determined that the applicant was a rehabilitative failure.  The determination was based on the criteria of substandard duty performance and continued abuse of alcohol.  It noted that a change to Army Regulation 635-200 clarified that the statement "Active Phase of Rehabilitation" meant the commander could, with the rehabilitation team, declare a member a rehabilitation failure at any time deemed necessary.  

On 7 December 1982, a mental status evaluation found the applicant to be mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and to adhere to the right, and to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in board proceedings.  He completed a separation physical examination on this date and was found to be qualified for separation.

On 13 December 1982, the applicant's commander initiated separation action on the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9 for alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.

On 13 December 1982, the applicant acknowledged notification of the action.  He submitted a statement in his own behalf.  He stated that he was improperly declared a rehabilitation failure.  He had attended only four meetings since July 1982, being removed from the program on 2 September 1982 in order to go to Germany for Reforger '82.  He was arrested on 6 December 1982 for driving while intoxicated but he had not yet been convicted of the offense.  It was his opinion he was a good noncommissioned officer.  

On 16 December 1982, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant given a general discharge.

On 11 January 1983, the applicant was discharged with a general discharge, in pay grade E-5, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9 for alcohol abuse - rehabilitation failure.  He had completed 8 years, 6 months, and  4 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 9 provides for the discharge of members based on alcohol or other drug abuse such as the illegal, wrongful or improper use of any controlled substance, alcohol or other drug when the soldier in enrolled in ADAPCP and the commander, in consultation with the rehabilitation team, determines that further rehabilitation efforts are not practical, rendering the soldier a rehabilitative failure.  

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.  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.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  The applicant’s separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The record of evidence shows he had a long history, as a noncommissioned officer, of alcohol-related incidents.  The characterization of his service as general was and still is appropriate.

3.  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

__RVO__  __BJE__  __KAH__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076917	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/10/24	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1983/01/11	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, ch 9 	
DISCHARGE REASON	A69.00	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.