RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  13 March 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070017282 


	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. Deyon D. Battle

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Mark D. Manning

Chairperson

Mr. Jeffrey C. Redmann

Member

Mr. Rowland C. Heflin

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 that his reentry eligibility (RE) code be changed from RE-4 to RE-3.

2.  The applicant states that he was separated in November 2004 as a result of being an alcohol rehabilitative failure.  He states, in effect, that although he has no evidence that the RE code that was assigned to him was unjust, he would still like his case to be considered.  He states that when he was separated from the Army, his alcohol consumption doubled and he blamed everyone else until he hit rock bottom and decided to get help.  He states that for the last 2 years, he has been working and helping to support the troops in Iraq as a contractor.  He states that the hardest part was not the war; it was the lack of alcohol.  He states that he has been alcohol free for 2 years; that he has been helping the Soldiers in Iraq cope with their alcohol and drug abuse; and that he counsels Soldiers regarding life in the military.  

3.  The applicant states that he has a desire to serve in the Army again, and that he disappointed his family, friends and himself.  He states that he is ashamed of his action and he is embarrassed.  He states that he loves the Army and that he has messed up things horribly.  He states that his command showed more than enough patience and they tried to help him understand the consequences of his actions; however, he could not understand.  He states that he is not expecting to be pitied and that he is not asking to be understood because it was his responsibility to understand the cause of his actions.  He concludes by stating that he knows that the Board rarely changes the RE code without substantial evidence; however, he has been sober for 2 years and he served in Iraq helping Soldiers with similar problems.  He states that he is not only humble; he is humiliated by his past actions. 

4.  The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of 




Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The available records indicate that the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 6 May 2003, in Kaiserslautern, Germany, for 4 years, in the pay grade of E-2.  He successfully completed his training as an automated logistics specialist.

3.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was counseled on at least ten separate occasions between 5 March 2004 and 12 October 2004, for acts of misconduct or unsatisfactory performance of duty, which included:  failure to take medication prescribed while he was attending Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Services (SARS); drinking alcohol while attending SARS; two incidents of failure to follow directives; two incidents of failure to follow a lawful order; writing an essay entitled "Of Racism and Hatred" and drawing a swastika within the pages of the essay; failure to report to his place of duty; being disrespectful in language towards a noncommissioned officer; maintaining an unacceptable barracks room/living conditions; denial of all favorable actions; disobeying a lawful order; and making racial comments.  Each time the applicant was counseled, he was told that his continued behavior may result in initiation of separation action to eliminate him from the Army.  He was also told he could receive an honorable discharge, a general discharge, or a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  He was informed that being furnished a less than fully honorably discharge could severely prejudice him in civilian life and that he could be deprived of military and veterans benefits.

4.  The available records indicate that nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant on 13 July 2004, for being disrespectful in language towards a commissioned officer and a noncommissioned officer on 5 April 2004, and two incidents on 22 June 2004.  His punishment consisted of a reduction in pay grade, extra duty and restriction.






5.  On 12 October 2004, the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure.  His commander cited:  failure to take his medication after admitting to being enrolled in SARS alcohol rehabilitating training; having alcohol in his living quarters; missing an appointment; and being under the influence of alcohol during the duty days, as a basis for his recommendation for discharge.  

6.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the recommendation for discharge on 12 October 2004, and he indicated that he was submitting statements in his own behalf.  However, there are no statements in the available records.

7.  In an undated memorandum, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge and he directed the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

8.  Accordingly, on 19 November 2004, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, due to alcohol rehabilitation failure.  He was furnished a general discharge, a JPD separation code, and an RE code of 4.

9.  The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) to upgrade his discharge and to change his RE code.  On 28 June 2006, the ADRB upgraded the applicant’s discharge to fully honorable.  However, the ADRB determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and voted not to change the reason.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5 serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It provides, in pertinent part, that the DD Form 214 will be prepared to reflect an individual's service as it exists on the date of release from active duty or discharge.

11.  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 RA and the 





United States 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.  This regulation provides that when an individual's Narrative Reason for Separation is alcohol rehabilitation failure, an RE code of 4 will be assigned.  An RE code of 4 applies to persons with a non-waivable disqualification.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was separated and assigned an RE code in accordance with the applicable regulation.  

2.  The Narrative Reason for Separation currently reflected on the applicant's 
DD Form 214 reflects that he was discharged for alcohol rehabilitation failure.  Therefore, he was properly assigned an RE code of 4.

3.  The applicant's contentions have been noted; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief in his case.   The fact that he now has a desire to reenter the Army is not a sufficient justification to change the RE code that he was assigned.  His DD Form 214 was prepared to reflect his service as it existed at that time of his discharge and at that time, he was a rehabilitation failure.  This information was properly annotated on his DD Form 214 and the 
RE code he was assigned coincides with his Narrative Reason for Separation. 

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show 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.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__MDM__  __JCR__  __RCH__  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.




___Mark D. Manning__
      CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070017282
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
20080313
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.  1021
100.0000/ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
2.  4
100.0300/CHANGE RE CODE
3.

4.

5.

6.