Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010721C070208
Original file (20040010721C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            4 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20040010721


      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             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Richard T. Dunbar             |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas            |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, a change to her reentry (RE) code.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, her RE code should be changed from RE-
4 to RE-1 based on the merits of the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB)
decision to upgrade the characterization of her discharge from general,
under honorable conditions to honorable.  She also indicates she would like
to reenlist in the Army and have a career as a Soldier.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement and the ADRB
proceedings in support of her application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant’s record shows she enlisted in the Regular Army and
entered active duty on 3 February 1995.  She was trained in, awarded and
served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 77F (Petroleum Supply
Specialist), and the highest rank she attained while serving on active duty
was specialist (SPC).

2.  The applicant’s record further shows that during her active duty
tenure, she earned the National Defense Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon,
and Marksman Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  The record documents no
acts of valor, or significant achievement.

3.  The applicant’s disciplinary history includes her acceptance of
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the
Uniform Code
of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 4 December 1997, for operating a passenger
car while drunk.  Her punishment for this offense included a reduction to
private/E-1 (PV1).

4.  On 4 November 1997, the applicant was enrolled in the Army Drug and
Alcohol Prevention Control Program (ADAPCP) for alcohol dependence.  The
applicant’s unit commander in consultation with the clinical director of
the ADAPCP declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure.  Based on this
action, the unit commander notified the applicant of the intent to separate
her under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200 with a
general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).

5.  On 20 February 1998, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was
advised of the basis for the contemplated separation and its effects, the
rights available to her and the effect of a waiver of those rights.
Subsequent to this counseling, she elected not to submit a statement in her
own behalf.
6.  On 2 March 1998, the separation authority approved the applicant’s
separation and directed she receive a GD.  On 20 March 1998, the applicant
was discharged accordingly.  The separation document (DD Form 214) she was
issued at the time confirms she completed a total of 3 years, 1 month and
18 days of active military service.  This document also shows she was
separated under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, by
reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure, and was assigned a separation
program designator (SPD) code of JPD and an RE code of RE-4.

7.  On 16 August 2002, the ADRB determined that the applicant’s overall
record of service supported an upgrade of the characterization of her
discharge from under honorable conditions to fully honorable.  However, the
ADRB concluded the reason for her separation was proper and equitable, and
it voted not to change it.

8.  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. Army Regulation 601-210 covers
eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and
processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3
of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service
applicants for enlistment. That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE
codes, including RA RE codes.  RE-4 applies to persons who are permanently
disqualified for continued Army service.

9.  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.  It states, in
pertinent part, that the SPD code of JPD is the appropriate code to assign
to Soldiers separated under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation
635-200, by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.  The SPD/RE Code
Cross Reference Table included in the regulation establishes RE-4 as the
proper code to assign members separated with this SPD code.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request to upgrade her RE code and the supporting
documents she submitted were carefully considered.  However, the evidence
of record confirms her separation processing was accomplished in accordance
with the applicable regulation.  All requirements of law and regulation
were met, and her rights were fully protected throughout the separation
process.
2.  The record also shows the ADRB voted to upgrade the characterization of
the applicant’s discharge based on her overall record of service.  However,
during its review of her case, the ADRB also concluded that the reason for
her separation was proper and equitable, and it voted not to change it.

3.  By regulation, the RE-4 code assigned the applicant was the proper code
to assign members separating under the provisions of chapter 9, Army
Regulation
635-200 for alcohol rehabilitation failure.  As a result, the RE-4 code
assigned was and still is appropriate based on the authority and reason for
her separation.

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.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JEA__  ___RTD   ___LMD__  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.




            ____James E. Anderholm___
                    CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040010721                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/08/04                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1998/03/20                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200 C9                           |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Alcohol Rehab Failure                   |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.  04   |100.0300                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063082C070421

    Original file (2001063082C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 24 November 1998, the applicant was notified by his commander that separation action was being initiated to separate him from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, based on his being an alcohol rehabilitation failure. 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, for alcohol rehabilitation failure. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019616

    Original file (20090019616.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 December 1996, the applicant's commander recommended her for discharge under the provisions of chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes), then in effect, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the SPD's to be used for these stated reasons. Pertinent Army regulations stated that prior to discharge or release...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029384

    Original file (20100029384.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to change his separation program designator (SPD) code and his reentry eligibility (RE) code. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) provides the specific authorities and reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. The SPD code JPD was the appropriate code for the applicant based on the guidance for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007546C070205

    Original file (20060007546C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's commander recommended that he be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separation), Chapter 9 for Alcohol or Other Drug Abuse Rehabilitation Failure. On 28 April 1998, the applicant was discharged from active duty for alcohol rehabilitation failure, in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 9. AR 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designated Codes), Table 2-3, states that the SPD code JPD denotes involuntary...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050015373C070206

    Original file (20050015373C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070012638

    Original file (20070012638.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080006331

    Original file (AR20080006331.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | 20130006521

    Original file (20130006521.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 October 1988, the applicant's commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him with a general discharge under honorable conditions under the provisions of chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations). 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 regulation showed that the SPD "JPD" as shown on the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063450C070421

    Original file (2001063450C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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. There is no evidence of record to substantiate the applicant’s claim that he applied for or was denied authorization of a FY98 early retirement.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024408

    Original file (20100024408.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant indicated she was providing medical records with her application; however these records were not with the application when it was received. The commander advised the applicant of her right to have her case considered by a board officers (if she had 6 or more years of total active and reserve service or an under other than honorable conditions recommendation is made by the separation authority), to appear in person before a board officers, to submit statements in her own...