| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| MR. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Mr. George D. Paxson | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to fully honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That, at the time of his service, he suffered from alcoholism. He did not know at the time that his family had an alcohol problem. Upon leaving the service, he has been treated for this disease. He provides four letters of support.
The letters of support reflect his honorable post service conduct.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military and medical records show:
On 2 December 1985, he enlisted in the Army. He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 13E (Fire Direction Specialist).
During the period 31 March to 28 July 1986, he served in Europe.
During the period 18 April to 2 May 1986, he was formally counseled on six occasions for his failure to obey orders, for being disrespectful to superior officers, for being disorderly, for making false official statements and for being drunk and disorderly.
During the period 24 May to 22 July 1986, he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on five occasions for his failure to go to his appointed place of duty, for disobeying lawful orders, for the wrongful use of provoking words, for breaking restriction, for being absent without leave, and for dishonorably failing to pay just debts.
The applicant did not exceed pay grade E-1 during his service.
On 18 June 1986, the unit commander notified the applicant of his intent to recommend him for discharge under chapter 13, Army Regulation 635-200, for unsatisfactory performance based on his substandard performance, repeated counseling by the chain of command, lack of motivation or positive attitudes toward responsibilities and no respect for authority. He was advised of his rights.
On 18 June 1986, the applicant, with counsel, acknowledged the commander’s intent, requested counsel and indicated that statements in his own behalf would not be submitted.
On 25 June 1986, a Mental Status Evaluation cleared the applicant for separation. He elected not to receive a separation physical examination.
On 9 July 1986, the appropriate separation authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed the applicant be issued an under honorable conditions discharge, with a General Discharge Certificate.
On 29 July 1986, he was discharged with a characterization of service of under honorable conditions and issued a General Discharge Certificate. His separation document indicates he had 7 months and 27 days of creditable service with one day of lost time.
On 16 December 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board found his discharge to be proper and equitable and denied his request for an upgrade.
Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory soldier.
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. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was properly discharged and he was medically and physically fit for retention at the time of his separation. The applicant has not submitted any probative evidence to the contrary.
2. No medical evidence has been presented by the applicant to demonstrate an injustice in the medical treatment received in service, or that his discharge and characterization was not proper.
3. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant's overall record of military service.
4. The Board has noted the letters of support; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating to overcome the characterization of his service. His contention concerning alcoholism has been noted; however, his alcohol consumption does not excuse his misconduct.
5. 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
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
_dsj____ _gdp____ _reb____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001064760 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020326 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065807C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. At the time of the applicant's separation an honorable or general discharge was authorized. The Board concludes that as he continued to drink, stopped attending Track II meetings before completion of the program, and continued to be involved in alcohol related incidents, he is clearly shown to be an alcohol rehabilitation failure.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017645
The applicant requests, in effect, that his Reentry Eligibility (RE) Code 3 be changed so that he may enlist in the Army. On 5 October 1987, the applicants commander recommended separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9, for failure to successfully complete the ADAPCP. Accordingly, he was discharged under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol abuse-rehabilitation failure.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002101C070205
On 16 April 1987, the applicant’s unit commander notified him that separation action under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635- 200, was being initiated on him because of his alcohol rehabilitation failure. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army Regulation 15-185, paragraph 2-8), effectively shortens that filing period, has...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012153
Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. By memorandum dated 29 October 1990, the applicant's ADAPCP Clinical Director advised the applicant's company commander that the applicant's enrollment in the treatment program was unsatisfactory. The SPD code of JPD was the appropriate code for the applicant based on the guidance provided in this regulation for Soldiers separating under the provisions of chapter 9, Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060005157C070205
Accordingly, the applicant was discharged with a general discharge on 23 June 1986 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. Although the applicant contends that he was mentally unstable at the time of his discharge, medical evidence of record shows he was found mentally responsible and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055838C070420
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. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005210
The immediate commander cited the specific reasons for this action as the applicant's positive test for a controlled substance on a recent unit urinalysis, poor potential for rehabilitation of alcohol abuse, and continued abuse that rendered him an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Therefore, the applicant's service does not warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007020
The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge. He was discharged on 30 April 1986 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with a general discharge. His record of service included numerous adverse counseling statements and one NJP.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012164
The applicant's military records show he enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-1, on 17 April 1979. On 31 July 1986, the applicant's company commander advised the applicant that he was initiating his separation pursuant to the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel) for his continued abuse of alcohol and rehabilitation failure. He was discharged in pay grade E-3 on 3 September 1986, under the provisions of Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003279
He was notified by his unit commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12b, misconduct. On 20 January 1987, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, by reason of misconduct. 10 Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.