IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  24 February 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100021674 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests a change to item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show medical instead of alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that prior to the event that resulted in his discharge his military occupational specialty (MOS) was 63B (Wheel Vehicle and Power Generation Mechanic), he had been chosen to be a hometown recruiter, and he volunteered for training as a Prescribed Load List (PLL) clerk which resulted in an early promotion.  He was proud to be a Soldier.  After leaving the Army he turned his life around and he became a commercial truck driver.  He would like to be able to share his military record. 

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence.

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 applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 October 1982.

3.  On 2 August 1983, he was enrolled in Track I of the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) at Fort Bliss, TX.  He successfully completed the program and he was released on 14 September 1983 with a recommendation to be retained on active duty.  

4.  On or about 3 November 1983, he enrolled himself in the ADAPCP Track II treatment counseling for alcohol abuse.

5.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, on 10 May 1984 for operating a vehicle while drunk.  

6.  On 8 May 1984, the Social Service Assistant, ADAPCP, Fort Bliss, notified his commander that further rehabilitation efforts were not practical and rendered the applicant a rehabilitation failure due to his marginal participation in the program and continued abuse of alcohol.  The memorandum stated rehabilitative failures will be processed for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation
635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 9.

7.  On 19 June 1984, his commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, because he lacked potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts were no longer practical.  Further, his inability to successfully discontinue his alcohol problem and his apathy toward improvement are not acceptable for a Soldier in the U.S. Army.  His retention would be detrimental to the maintenance of good order and discipline.

8.  The commander advised him of his right to submit statements in his own behalf, to obtain copies of all documents used in the preparation of his separation packet, and to consult with and be represented by military or civilian counsel.  He was also advised he could waive any of these rights and to withdraw any waiver of rights at any time prior to the date the discharge authority directs or approves his discharge.


9.  On 26 June 1984, the separation authority approved the recommendation for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9 (Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure) and directed he receive an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

10.  On 6 July 1984, he was discharged accordingly.  His DD Form 214 shows at the time of his separation he had completed 1 year, 9 months, and 1 day of total active service.  Item 26 (Separation Code) shows the entry "JPD."  Item 28 shows the entry "Alcohol Abuse Rehabilitation Failure."

11.  There is no indication in the available records of any injury or illness that would have warranted his entry into the Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES).

12.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.  It also established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  It states for Item 28, enter the reason for separation based on the regulatory or statutory authority.

13.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (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 "JPD" is the appropriate code to assign to Soldiers separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure.

14.  Army Regulation 635-40 (Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, or Separation) provides that the medical treatment facility commander with the primary care responsibility will evaluate those referred to him and will, if it appears as though the member is not medically qualified to perform duty or fails to meet retention criteria, refer the member to a medical evaluation board (MEB).  Those members who do not meet medical retention standards will be referred to a physical evaluation board (PEB) for a determination of whether they are able to perform the duties of their grade and military specialty with the medically-disqualifying condition.

15.  Army Regulation 635-40, paragraph 2-2b(1), in effect at the time, provided that when a member was separated by reasons other than physical disability, his or her continued performance of assigned duty appropriate with his or her rank or 


grade until he or she was scheduled for separation or retirement created a presumption that he or she was fit.  This presumption could be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence that he or she was unable to perform his or her duties for a period of time or that acute grave illness or injury or other deterioration of physical condition, occurring immediately prior to or coincident with separation, rendered the member unfit.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests the Board consider changing his narrative reason for separation to medical; however, there is no evidence in the available records and the applicant did not provide any evidence, to show he had an unfitting medical condition or should have been referred to the Army PDES for consideration by either an MEB or a PEB prior to his administrative discharge.  

2.  Records confirm he was separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, based on alcohol rehabilitation failure.  In addition, the governing separation regulations confirm that the narrative reason for his discharge is valid and appropriate based on his approved separation.

3.  The evidence shows he was properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time.  There is no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.  All requirements of law and regulation were met, and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X____  ___X_____  ___X_____  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.



      ___________X____________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100021674



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100021674



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1