MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 28 March 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001063544

         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. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson
Mr. Lester Echols		Member
Mr. Thomas Lanyi		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 reentry eligibility (RE) Code be changed from a code of RE-4 to a code of RE-1 so that he may be eligible to enlist in the Marine Corps.

APPLICANT STATES: That he enrolled himself in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) after he began drinking due to stress related, marital problems. However, he was separated under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 as an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure with a general discharge after one relapse of drinking alcohol while enrolled in the ADAPCP. He also states that he is divorced and he has been sober for 3 years. He contends that his behavior will not be repeated. He submits in support of his request a judgment for dissolution of marriage, dated 10 August 1998, and a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

On 20 September 2001, the applicant states in a letter written to his Representative in Congress that he tried to reenlist in the Armed Forces and that he met with resistance due to his RE code. He states that, at the time of his discharge, he was a newlywed assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington, and his wife was in Illinois and unable to join him. He pleaded with his chain of command to reassign him or to give him a hardship discharge. He also contends that he was later discharged under the provisions of chapter 11 (sic) after he enrolled himself in the ADAPCP because of his heavy drinking brought on by his long distance relationship. At age 26, he is divorced and he has a completely different outlook on life.

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

In 1994, prior to the period of enlistment under review, the applicant enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR). He was ordered to active duty for training from February-June 1994. On 6 August 1996, he was honorably discharged for the purpose of enlistment in the Regular Army (RA).

On 7 August 1996, the applicant enlisted in the RA for 3 years and his previous military occupational specialty (MOS) 75E (Personnel Actions Specialist). He was assigned permanent duty at Fort Lewis, Washington.

On 12 May 1997, the applicant was referred to the ADAPCP for evaluation by his chain of command. The reason for the command’s referral is not a matter of record, however, the initial screening revealed that the applicant's primary substance abuse was alcohol. Based on the 22 may 1997 evaluation, the ADAPCP counselor, the applicant's unit commander, and the applicant met and determined that the applicant had problems significant enough to warrant enrollment in Track II. It was also determined that the applicant would receive counseling therapy once a week, or more frequently, for the first 30 days and then twice a month for the duration of his rehabilitation period. He would also receive a one-time urinalysis test; he would attend alcoholics anonymous meetings twice weekly; and he would voluntarily take antabuse for 90 days.

On 27 November 1997, the applicant became intoxicated and urinated on another soldier's door in the barracks. The Charge-of-Quarters confronted the applicant and he admitted to being drunk and urinating on the door.

On 7 January 1998, the appropriate authority at ADAPCP recommended that the applicant be declared an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure due to his inability to meet the requirements of the ADAPCP.

On 8 January 1998, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for
urinating on the door. His punishment included reduction from pay grade E-3 to pay grade E-2 and 14 days’ extra duty and restriction.

On 27 January 1998, a medical examination cleared the applicant for separation.
On 24 February 1998, the applicant's commander notified the applicant that he was being declared an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure and that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of chapter 9, AR 635-200, with a general discharge (GD).

On 25 February 1998, legal counsel advised the applicant of the basis for the contemplated action, its effects, and the rights available to him. He acknowledged that he understood the ramifications of receiving a GD. The available records do not contain a statement submitted by the applicant in his own behalf. He was not entitled to consideration or a personal appearance before a board of officers.

On 3 March 1998, competent authority approved the recommendation and directed the issuance of a GD, by reason of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure under the provisions of chapter 9, AR 635-200.

On 16 March 1998, the applicant was discharged with a GD under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 9, by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure and assigned an RE code of RE-4. He had completed 1 year, 7 months, and 10 days of active military service on the enlistment under review and he had completed 4 months of prior active military service. He had also completed 2 years, 3 months and 13 days of inactive military service. He had no recorded lost time.

The available records do not indicate that the applicant ever made application for the review of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board.

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 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. A member may also be separated if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical. Army policy states that an HD or a GD is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE
codes, based on the reason for discharge. AR 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlisting and processing into the RA and the eligibility for prior service applicants for enlistment. That chapter includes a list of Armed Forces RE codes and RA RE codes.

An RE code of RE-4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service. Those individuals discharged under the provisions of chapter 9, AR 635-200, as a result of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure are assigned RE-4 codes and are disqualified from further service. The disqualification is nonwaivable.

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

2. The applicant was referred to the ADAPCP by his command and he violated the requirements to remain in the ADAPCP by continuing to drink alcohol.

3. The applicant was properly separated in accordance with chapter 9, AR 635-200, which governs those soldiers involved in alcohol-related incidents while enrolled in ADAPCP. He was properly assigned an RE code of RE-4.

4. There is no evidence available to indicate that the applicant ever requested a hardship discharge or reassignment. The Board determined that even if such a request was denied, he had many other legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance without resulting to the abuse of alcohol and the misconduct that led to the separation action under review.

5. The dissolution of the applicant's marriage does not provide a basis for waiver or disqualification of his RE code. The assigned RE code was and still is appropriate.
6. 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

__FNE __ __LE____ __TL____ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001063544
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20020328
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(GD)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19980316
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200
DISCHARGE REASON	A69.00
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	144.6900
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.