RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  10 July 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060017820 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Ms. Joyce A. Wright

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Kathleen Newman

Chairperson

Ms. Susan A. Powers

Member

Mr. Edward E. Montgomery

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, that item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), be corrected to show a more favorable reason.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he messed up and destroyed his career in the service.  He loved the service and would love to be a part of it again.  He did not fulfill his end of the contract he signed and swore to.  He states that he would be grateful to fulfill his end of the deal.  It means that much to him.  He very much wants to be back in the military doing his part; the part that he did not finish.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 26 June 1997, the date of his discharge.  The application submitted in this case is dated 28 December 2006 but was received for processing on 10 January 2007.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 February 1995, as a track vehicle repairer, in military occupational specialty (MOS), 63H.  He was promoted to pay grade E-3 effective 1 January 1996. 

4.  On 18 December 1996, the applicant referred himself to the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) into the outpatient treatment program.  He participated unsatisfactorily in treatment due to his continued use of alcohol.  

5.  On 18 March 1997, the applicant was considered to be a rehabilitation failure. 

6.  On 10 April 1997, the applicant was counseled for failing to meet the ADAPCP requirements.  On 8 May 1997, the applicant was declared a rehabilitation failure. 

7.  On 2 June 1997, the applicant's commander recommended him for discharge from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol or other drug abuse rehabilitation failure.  He cited as the basis for his recommendation, the applicant’s unsatisfactory participation in the ADAPCP due to his continued use of alcohol.  He was informed that he was recommending he receive an honorable or general discharge certificate and that he had the right to consult with counsel.  

8.  The applicant acknowledged receipt and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.  He also understood that if the commanders' recommendation was approved, he could receive either an honorable or general discharge.

9.  On 19 June 1997, the separation authority approved the recommendation for the applicant's discharge and directed he be furnished an honorable discharge.  The applicant was discharged on 26 June 1997.  He had a total of 2 years, 4 months, and 24 days of creditable service.

10.  Item 26 (Separation Code), of the applicant's DD Form 214, shows the entry "JPD" and item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation), shows the entry "Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure." 

11.  The applicant's signature was affixed to item 21 (Signature of Member being Separated), of his DD Form 214, indicating he had reviewed the information shown on the form and it was complete and correct, to the best of his knowledge.

12.  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 Army's Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (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.





13.  Army Regulation 635-5-1, in effect at that time, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons.  The regulation shows that the separation program designator (SPD) "JPD," as shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214, specifies the narrative reason for discharge as "Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure" and that the authority for discharge under this SPD is "Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence shows that the applicant referred himself to the ADAPCP on 18 December 1996 into the outpatient treatment program.  He participated unsatisfactorily in treatment due to his continued use of alcohol.  He was declared a rehabilitation failure and was processed for a chapter 9 discharge.

2.  Separation proceedings were initiated against the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol or other drug abuse rehabilitative failure.  

3.  The evidence shows that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure.  He was issued a SPD Code of "JPD" and was furnished an honorable discharge.

4.  The separation code of "JPD" was entered in its appropriate space on the DD Form 214 and the narrative reason for his discharge was shown to be, "Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure."

5.  It is noted that the applicant’s separation authority "AR 635-200, Chap 9" and the narrative reason for his separation of "Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure" were correct in accordance with regulations, then in effect, and as shown on his
DD Form 214.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to show these entries were made erroneously, there is an insufficient basis to delete these entries from his DD Form 214.

6.  The applicant contends he wishes to reenlist in the military to fulfill his end of the contract he signed and swore to; however, the narrative reason prevents him from reenlisting.



7.  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.

8.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 26 June 1997; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 25 June 2000.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__SP____  __EM___  __KAN__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




_____K A Newman_______
          CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060017820
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070710
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19970626
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200, chap 9
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
110
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.