PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 19 June 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002082576


         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Ms. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson
Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		Member
Mr. William D. Powers		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

---

2. The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

3. The applicant states that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on a traffic accident and that up until that point, his service was impeccable. He states that he received every peacetime award in his unit and that he received a prior honorable discharge at the time of his reenlistment. He goes on to state that he began to have difficulty with the leadership and that, as a noncommissioned officer, when he complained about an incident involving a staff sergeant who drove an enlisted man to a remote location and punched him, the staff sergeant was verbally admonished; however, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was not imposed against him. He states that he was singled out for his objections and harassed to the point that he received several Articles 15 and later discharged after his accident. He further states that the way he handled the situation was a mistake; however, he believes that his military record and performance while he was in other units will show that he had no personal problems nor did he have an alcohol or drug addiction.

4. He concludes by stating that his post service record and references will show that he had no problems when he was in the Army and that for the last 16 years, he has been operating in K-9 training which consists of basic obedience and narcotic and explosive detection. In support of his application, he submits copies of letters of commendation, appreciation and awards and decorations that he received while he was in the Army; a copy of his High School Equivalency Certificate; a copy of his General Education Development test scores; a copy of his Honorable Discharge Certificate for completion of his first term of service; a copy of a letter from a member of congress dated 27 July 1989, attesting to his post service character and conduct; a copy of a letter from the Undersheriff of Bay County dated 2 March 1994; a copy of a letter of appreciation from the Bay City Public Schools dated 26 May 1999; a copy of a letter dated 12 April 1999, appointing him to the Bay County Animal Control Advisory Committee; and copies of letters from the Bay City Public Schools, the Director, Animal Control and Humane Society thanking him for his assistance in various programs.

5. On 26 October 1978, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1. He successfully completed his training as an infantryman.

6. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-2 on 26 April 1979, to pay grade E-3 on 1 September 1976 and to pay grade E-4 on 1 January 1980.

7. His awards include the Good Conduct Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon and the Air Assault Badge.

8. He completed 2 years, 10 months and 11 days of total active service and on 7 August 1981, he reenlisted in the Army for an additional 4 years in the pay grade of E-4. On 1 December 1981, he was promoted to the pay grade of E-5.

9. The applicant was counseled on nine separate occasions between 8 January 1982 and 2 June 1982, for missing formation; being late for formation; disrespect towards a noncommissioned officer, not shaving in the field; and his overall performance.

10. On 30 March 1982, NJP was imposed against the applicant for failure to obey a lawful order. His punishment consisted of restriction and extra duty.

11. On 27 May 1982, as a result of a command referral, the applicant was enrolled in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Control Program (ADAPCP). In the progress report, the Clinical Director stated that the applicant was referred as a result of his failure to repair on three separate occasions in May 1982 and for being unable to participate in physical training tests due to heavy alcohol consumption. The Clinical Director further stated he had a history of using alcohol and various other drugs since early adolescence and that he had been counseled on numerous occasions within his chain of command without positive results. The Clinical Director went on to state that the applicant had received individual counseling sessions and that his participation in group counseling was limited to immature, passive-aggressive actions and a noticeable lack of sincere thought or behavior. The Clinical Director rated his progress as unsatisfactory stating that the applicant clearly demonstrated his inability or unwillingness to remain free from alcohol and other drugs, as he had received the maximum rehabilitative efforts. The Clinical Director determined that he clearly demonstrated recalcitrance to the degree that further rehabilitative efforts within the military would not prove beneficial.

12. The applicant had NJP imposed against him on 23 June 1982, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay, restriction and extra duty.

13. On 14 July 1982, he was barred from reenlistment based on his records of NJP, his numerous counseling sessions and his ADAPCP progress report. The commanding officer stated that the applicant indicated a desire to be separated from the Army at the earliest opportunity and that he was in the process of being discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, based on alcohol or other drug abuse.

14. On 3 August 1982, NJP was imposed against him for failure to go to his appointed place of duty. His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.

15. On 4 August 1982, the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9. The commander cited constant abuse of alcohol and drugs coupled with disciplinary problems surrounding the abuse as a basis for the recommendation for discharge. He acknowledged receipt of the notification, waived his right to counsel and opted not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

16. The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge. Accordingly, on 1 September 1982, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, under the exemption policy, based on alcohol and drug abuse. He had completed 3 years, 10 months and 6 days of total active service and the commanding officer directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.

17. There is no evidence of record that shows that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

18. 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.

19. The same regulation also provides specific guidance in characterizing the service of individual discharged for alcohol abuse. Paragraph 3-8 incorporates the provisions of the drug/alcohol exemption policy, as prescribed in Army Regulation 600-85, which provides that under the exemption policy, the characterization of an individual’s service is restricted to fully honorable if the decision to initiate discharge against a service member is motivated by the member’s having been identified as an alcohol abuser.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. Although the applicant's commander directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate, his recommendation for discharge was motivated by the applicant’s conduct related to alcohol or drug abuse.

2. Inasmuch as the commander cited as the basis for his recommendation, the applicant’s constant abuse of alcohol and drugs, coupled with disciplinary problems surrounding his abuse, this Board is convinced that the applicant was


entitled to receive an honorable discharge based on his unsatisfactory performance in the ADAPCP. The records show that he was discharged under the drug/alcohol exemption policy and in accordance with the applicable regulation the applicant should have been furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

3. The applicant’s record reveals a history of chronic alcohol or drug abuse, which appears to have been the root of his pattern of misconduct that, for most part, consisted of minor military offenses. Although the Board in no way condones such conduct, it must be noted that these offenses appear to have stemmed from his alcohol and drug abuse and should be put in perspective with his manner of destructive behavior at the time.

4. He was properly referred to the ADAPCP for treatment and rehabilitation and he was, in fact, a rehabilitation failure. However, he had completed almost 3 years of honorable service prior to the incidents, which lead to his discharge for alcohol or drug abuse.

5. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected showing that the individual concerned was honorably discharged on 1 September 1982.

2. That the Department of the Army issue to the individual concerned an Honorable Discharge Certificate from the Army of the United States, dated 1 September 1982, in lieu of the general discharge of the same date now held by him.

BOARD VOTE:

___js ___ __wdp___ __lem___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  ______John N. Slone______
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002082576
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	2003/06/19
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	GD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19820901
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200, Ch 9
DISCHARGE REASON	680
BOARD DECISION	GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 685	144.6905
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.