| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that the narrative reason for his discharge and his reentry (RE) code be changed.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, in 1999 after having a few beers, while off-duty on a weekend he was called and told to report for duty. This resulted in his being counseled by his chain of command in regard to his drinking. He asks that his RE code be changed from RE-4 to RE-3 so that he would be allowed to return to duty. He claims that he never had an alcohol related incident nor was he given a blood alcohol content (BAC) test. He was advised that if he appealed the separation action they would find a way to send him to prison.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He initially entered the Regular Army on 15 September 1988 and reenlisted for the enlistment under review on 11 August 1995. During his last enlistment he was performing duties in military occupational specialty (MOS) 88M
(Motor Transport Operator).
The applicant was command referred to the Community Counseling Center, Grafenwoehr, Germany for alcohol related problems and on 23 August 1999, he was enrolled in the Army Drug and Alcohol Prevention Control Program (ADAPCP).
On 6 December 1999, the applicant accepted NJP for being incapacitated for the proper performance of his duty due to an overindulgence in intoxicating liquor and his punishment for this offense included a suspended reduction to specialist/E-4 (SPC/E-4). This suspended reduction was vacated and the applicant was reduced based on his failure to report to his appointed place of duty on 22 December 1999.
On 18 January 2000, the applicant’s unit commander in consultation with the ADAPCP, Clinical Director declared the applicant an ADAPCP rehabilitation failure.
On 8 June 2000, the applicant accepted NJP for unlawfully killing a German national by striking him while driving a motor vehicle in a negligent manner and for wrongfully making a false statement under oath. His punishment for these offenses included a reduction to private first class/E-3 (PFC/E-3).
On 18 July 2000, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of alcohol abuse-rehabilitation failure, and that he was recommending the applicant receive a general, under honorable conditions discharge.
The applicant was advised of his rights and consulted legal counsel. After being advised of the impact of the contemplated separation action by counsel, the applicant waived his right to consideration of his case before an administrative separation board and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 18 August 2000, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation efforts, approved the separation action, and directed the applicant receive an honorable discharge. On 22 September 2000, he was discharged accordingly.
The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant on the date of his discharge verifies that he received an honorable discharge, in the rank of PFC/E-3, after completing a total of 12 years and 8 days of active military service. This document also confirms that he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure, and that he was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JPD and an RE code of RE-4.
On 14 February 2001, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for a change to the narrative reason for his separation and found the reason for his discharge was both proper and equitable.
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 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.
Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The SPD code of JPD was the appropriate code for the applicant based on the guidance provided in Army Regulation 635-5-1 for soldiers separating under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure. In addition, Table 2-3 (SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table), Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes RE-4 as the proper reentry code to assign to soldiers separated for this reason.
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. Notwithstanding the applicant’s contentions, in view of the circumstances of this case, the Board finds the narrative reason for the applicant’s discharge and his RE code were properly assigned in accordance with applicable law and regulations in effect at the time.
2. The applicant’s prior honorable service was appropriately recognized with the honorable characterization of service awarded at the time and it is clear that he was processed for separation only after rehabilitation efforts had failed.
3. Further, the Board is satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process. Thus, the Board concludes that relief is not warranted in this case.
4. 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 or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
5. 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
__KAK__ __RWA__ __KWL__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001053160 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2001/07/10 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 2000/09/22 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 C9 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 189 | 110.0000 |
| 2. 4 | 100.0300 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080006331
The separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 9, alcohol or other drug rehabilitation failure. Furthermore, according to AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) codes, the narrative reason for separation should have been "alcohol rehabilitation failure" and the separation (SPD) code "JPD." Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to:...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003639
The applicant's commander recommended him for discharge under the provisions of chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 due to his failure to complete the ADAPCP and that he be issued a General Discharge Certificate. In a letter, dated 28 January 2009, the applicant's doctor stated the applicant had a problem with alcohol prior to being discharged from the Army and he has had no problems with alcoholism since. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008078
The applicant's records show he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years on 11 September 1997. The SPD Codes of "JPC/JPD" are the correct codes for Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, by reason of "drug/alcohol rehabilitation failure." The evidence of record shows his RE code was assigned based on the fact that he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol or other drug rehabilitation failure.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002928
Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned reentry codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. It also shows the SPD code with a corresponding RE code and states that more than one RE code could apply. The evidence shows that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010523C071029
On 7 January 2001, the applicant was honorably discharged, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure. He was given a separation program designator (SPD) code of JPD (separation for alcohol rehabilitation failure under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9) and an RE code of 4. Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070012638
The applicant was further advised that he was being recommended for a general under honorable conditions discharge with the reason for discharge as alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) shows the entry "JPD" denotes separation for Alcohol or Other Drug Abuse Rehabilitation Failure. The author stated, in effect, that the applicant had struggled with alcohol abuse while on active duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014970
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 November 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080014970 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. It also confirms he received a HD and that based on the authority and reason for his separation, he was assigned a Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JPD and an RE code of 4. The regulation identifies the SPD code of JPD as the appropriate code to assign members separated under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of alcohol...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009885
The applicant requests, in effect, a change to the Reentry (RE) code listed on his Separation Document (DD Form 214), dated 29 August 2000. On 17 August 2000, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that separation action was being initiated on him under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of ADAPCP rehabilitation failure. By regulation, the RE-4 code assigned the applicant was the proper code to assign members separating under the provisions of chapter...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04100730C070208
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. The applicant’s RE Code is appropriate considering the basis for his separation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050015373C070206
Edward E. Montgomery | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. It was recommended that the applicant be separated from military service under the appropriate regulation. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge.