BOARD DATE: 1 November 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120008056 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 that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), ending on 21 December 1982, be corrected in: * item 25 (Separation Authority) * item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) 2. The applicant states he missed one alert and was sent to drug and alcohol rehabilitation. He claims he has no other charges or counseling documents in his military records and he never received a medical diagnosis for alcoholism. He claims there are no documents in his record that support anything other than an honorable discharge. 3. The applicant provides no documentary evidence in support of his request. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 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. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Army (RA), on 16 February 1973, and he was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76Y (Unit Supply Specialist). He served for 2 years, 11 months, and 24 days until being released from active duty (REFRAD) and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve to complete his military service obligation on 9 February 1976. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he earned the National Defense Service Medal and held the rank of specialist four (SP4)/E-4 on the date of his REFRAD. 3. On 21 June 1978, he enlisted in the RA for 3 years and began the period of enlistment under review. His record documents no acts of valor or significance achievement during this period. It shows he earned the National Defense Service Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, and Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar. 4. The applicant's record shows that he was promoted to sergeant/E-5 on 10 October 1980 and that this is the highest rank he attained in while an active duty status. It also shows he was reduced to specialist four/E-4 for cause on 22 July 1982. 5. The applicant's disciplinary history includes his acceptance of non-judicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on the following three separate occasions for the offenses indicated: a. 11 July 1979, failure to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed; b. 11 December 1980, disobeying a lawful order; and c. 22 July 1982, failure to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed and disobeying a lawful order 6. On 18 November 1980, the applicant was admitted to the residential treatment program at the U.S. Army Hospital, Nuremburg, Germany for alcohol abuse. He was given a diagnostic code of 3031 (alcoholism, habitual, excessive drinking). He successfully completed the program and returned to duty with follow up at the local Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Control Program (ADAPCP). 7. On 24 June 1982, the applicant was referred to the ADAPCP for evaluation based on several incidents of being intoxicated for duty due to prior indulgence in alcohol. 8. On 2 September 1982, the unit commander notified the applicant action was being initiated to eliminate him from service under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) based on his continuous abuse of alcohol after attempts to reform him had been made. 9. On 29 September 1982, the Bamberg Germany ADAPCP clinical supervisor provided a progress report on the applicant. It indicated the applicant was on his second enrollment in ADAPCP and continued to show negative alcohol-related behavior. He further stated the applicant’s behavior indicated the goals established in the applicant’s rehabilitation plan were not attained. The applicant was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by the command. 10. On 8 December 1982, the separation authority directed the applicant be eliminated from service for personal abuse of drugs and alcohol in accordance with chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200 and that he be issued an honorable discharge. On 21 December 1982, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he held the rank of SP4/E-4 and had completed 4 years, 6 months, and 1 day of net active service this period. 11. There is no indication that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for a change to the reason for his separation within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations. 12. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 9 contains the authority and outlines the procedures for discharging individuals 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. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s request to change his narrative reason for separation and separation authority based one misconduct offense was carefully considered and there is insufficient evidence to support this claim. 2. The evidence of record confirms the applicant’s disciplinary history included his acceptance of NJP on three separate periods for various incidents of misconduct. It also shows he was given repeated opportunities for rehabilitation through the ADAPCP prior to being declared a rehabilitation failure. 3. The evidence of record further confirms the applicant’s separation processing was accomplished in accordance with the applicable regulation. All requirements of law and regulatory were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant’s abuse of alcohol, his failure to complete the ADAPCP, and his unwillingness to rehabilitate clearly supported his discharge by reason of “alcohol abuse-rehabilitation failure.” 4. In view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ 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 that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ x_______ ___ 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) AR20120008056 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120008056 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1