IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 April 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120017293 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 removal of the entry "Alcohol Abuse - Rehabilitation Failure" as the narrative reason for separation from his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). 2. The applicant states he does not want people to know about his alcohol abuse. When he was at the Rehabilitation Center in Stuttgart, Germany, he overslept and missed one session. He was designated as an alcohol rehabilitation failure. What happened is that on Saturday morning, 4 December 1982, he woke up in a military housing area in Frankfurt, Germany and found his German girlfriend dead. That really upset him and he started drinking heavily. His unit sent him to a rehabilitation center in Stuttgart to help him cope with what he went through. This helped him until one day he missed a session which led to the alcohol rehabilitation failure label. He ultimately received a general discharge. 3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214. 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. Having had prior service, the applicant's records show he reenlisted in the Regular Army on 30 August 1978 and held military occupational specialty 76V (Materiel Storage and Handling Specialist). 3. He served through multiple reenlistments in a variety of stateside and overseas assignments, including Germany from 28 September 1981 to 21 February 1983, and he attained the rank/grade of staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6. 4. On 12 February 1982, he was enrolled in the Army Drug and Alcohol Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) as a self-referral upon recommendation of his company commander. 5. On 10 January 1983, the Clinical Director of the Hanau South Counseling Center submitted a synopsis of the applicant's ADAPCP rehabilitation activities. He stated: a. The applicant was enrolled on 12 February 1982. He was enrolled in Track III rehabilitation. He attended but did not graduate from, five weeks of residential alcohol treatment at Bad Cannstadt, Germany. He participated in 15 sessions of individual counseling and one group session at the Hanau South Counseling Center. b. His progress during the first 180 days was poor. However, he did meet the goal of no alcohol-related incidents. His potential for successful rehabilitation in the military environment was poor. 6. It appears the applicant's immediate commander declared him a rehabilitation failure and on 9 February 1983, the applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) for ADAPCP failure. 7. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's intent to separate him and 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 the procedures/rights available to him. The applicant submitted a statement wherein he recapped his military service, achievements, and love of serving his country. He stated that although he made a mistake, he would go on pushing to better himself in the future. All people make mistakes and nobody is perfect. 8. The separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 and directed the applicant be discharged from the Army for alcohol abuse and furnished a General Discharge Certificate. The applicant was accordingly discharged on 22 February 1983. 9. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he was discharged on 22 February 1983 under the provisions of chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of "alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure" with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions. This form further shows he completed 4 years, 5 months, and 23 days during this period of service and he also had 7 years, 3 months, and 17 days of prior active service. This form also shows in: * Item 26 (Separation Code) - "JPD" * Item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation" - "Alcohol Abuse - Rehabilitation Failure" 10. On 18 December 1981, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) voted to upgrade his character of service to a fully honorable discharge. However, the ADRB determined the reason for the discharge was proper and equitable. Accordingly, it voted not to change it. 11. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 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 unless the Soldier is in an entry-level status and an uncharacterized service is required. 12. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) states that the separation program designator (SPD) codes are three-character alphabetic combinations which identify reasons for and types of separation from active duty. The SPD code JPD is the correct code for Soldiers separating under chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The evidence of record shows he exhibited an alcohol abuse problem and he was provided with the opportunity to overcome his problem through counseling and referral to and enrollment in the ADAPCP. However, he showed poor rehabilitation potential. He was therefore declared an ADAPCP rehabilitation failure and accordingly his immediate commander initiated separation action against him. All requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. 2. His narrative reason for separation and corresponding separation code were assigned based on the fact that he was discharged for being an alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure. Absent his rehabilitation failure, there was no fundamental reason to process the applicant's request for separation. The underlying reason for his discharge was his rehabilitation failure. The only valid narrative reason for separation permitted under that paragraph is "alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure" and the corresponding SPD code is "JPD." Absent an error or an injustice in the narrative reason for his separation, there is no reason to change it. 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) AR20120017293 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120017293 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1