IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  1 May 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110021320 


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 correction of the narrative reason for separation from "Alcohol Abuse – Rehabilitation Failure" to "Hardship."

2.  The applicant states shortly after his arrival in Germany, he received notice that his uncle and aunt, who were like parents to him, had died within 2 months of each other.  That began a series of bad news for him.  He then took emergency leave due to his father's illness and upon his return; he was two hours late for a flight from Charleston Air Force Base.  The taxi driver took him to the city of Charleston instead of Charleston Air Force Base.  He missed his flight and received an Article 15 for being late from leave.  He then learned that his father had cancer and decided he just wanted to be with him.  He realizes that the way he handled things was wrong.  He also admits to being an alcohol rehabilitation failure.  However, he has been sober and given the immaturity and stress of the situation at the time, he used the rehabilitation failure to get back home.  

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and his father's death certificate.

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 January 1981 and he held military occupational specialty 94B (Food Service Specialist).  The highest rank/grade he attained during his military service was private first class/E-3.

3.  His records show he served in Germany from June 1981 to December 1982.  He was awarded or authorized the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16), Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade bar, Army Service Ribbon, and Overseas Service Ribbon.

4.  On 1 April 1982, he was counseled for breaking a lobby door after he had been drinking.

5.  He accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice on/for:

* 25 August 1982, being drunk and disorderly at a fest and at the Military Police station
* 15 December 1982, failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty

6.  On 8 October 1982, he failed to report for duty following a late night of drinking the previous evening.

7.  A memorandum, dated 25 October 1982, shows he was medically referred to emergency room on 17 February 1982 for being intoxicated while seeking medical assistance.  He had been placed in the Community Counseling Center and he was offered extended care facility and detoxification ward and anti-abuse, but he refused.  Rehabilitation efforts included drug and alcohol awareness, individual and group counseling, value clarification, legal aspects of drug and alcohol abuse, and coping skills.  Despite the efforts, he continued to act out.  The counselor recommended his discharge. 

8.  A memorandum, dated 2 November 1982, shows his commanding officer counseled him repeatedly regarding his drinking problem.  During the counseling session, it was determined that his duty performance had not been affected but he did not respond positively to counseling or take an active and continuing interest in the rehabilitation efforts.  

9.  On 2 November 1985, the applicant's immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him in accordance with chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 for being and alcohol or drug rehabilitation failure.  The immediate commander cited the specific reasons for this action as the applicant's repeated alcohol abuse and failure to demonstrate rehabilitation potential.  

10.  On 2 November 1982, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's intent to separate him and he was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action, the type of discharge he could receive, the effect on further enlistment or reenlistment, and of the procedures/rights that were available to him.  He acknowledged that he understood he may encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge under honorable conditions was issued to him and he elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf.

11.  On 2 November 1982, his immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of alcohol abuse –rehabilitation failure and recommended the issuance of a General Discharge Certificate.

12.  On 2 November 1982, consistent with the chain of command's recommendations and a review for legal sufficiency, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge action under the provisions of chapter 9, Army Regulation 635-200, due to alcohol abuse –rehabilitation failure, and directed the issuance of an honorable discharge.  Item 26 (Separation Code) shows the entry "JKL."

13.  The applicant was accordingly discharged on 20 December 1982.  The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms he completed a total of 1 year, 11 months, and 15 days of creditable military service.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  

	a.  Chapter 9 contains the authority and outlines the procedures for discharging Soldiers 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.  Initiation of separation proceedings is required for Soldiers designated as alcohol/drug rehabilitation failures.  The service of Soldiers discharged under this chapter will be characterized as honorable or general under honorable conditions unless the Soldier is in an entry-level status and an uncharacterized description of service is required.

	b.  Chapter 6 governs separation because of dependency or hardship.  It states that a hardship exists when in circumstances not involving death or disability of a member of the Soldier's (or spouse's) immediate family, separation from the service will materially affect the care or support of the family by alleviating undue and genuine hardship.  Paragraph 6-3b(1) provides that a married Soldier who becomes a parent by birth, adoption, or marriage (stepparent), and whose child or children under 18 years of age reside within the household, may apply for separation under hardship.  The Soldier must submit evidence that the roles of parent and Soldier are incompatible and that they cannot fulfill his or her military obligation without neglecting the child or children.  Paragraph 6-3b(2) provides that Soldiers who are sole parents and whose children under 18 years of age reside within the household may apply for separation under hardship.  A "sole parent" is defined as a parent who is single by reason of never having been married or is divorced or legally separated and has been awarded child custody by judicial decree or court order or is a widow or widower.

15.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator Codes) states that the separation program designator (SPD) codes are three-character alphabetic combinations which identify reasons for and types of separation from active duty.  The SPD code JPD is the correct code for Soldiers separating  under chapter 9 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure and SPD code MDB is the correct code for Soldier's separating under chapter 6 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of hardship.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant suffered from an alcohol abuse problem.  Subsequent to multiple alcohol-related incidents, he was provided the opportunity to overcome his problems through counseling and enrollment in an alcohol abuse program; however, he showed poor rehabilitation potential and failed to make any progress.  He was therefore declared an alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure and accordingly his immediate commander initiated separation action against him.  All requirements of law and regulation were met and his rights were fully protected throughout the separation process.

2.  His narrative reason for separation and corresponding SPD code were assigned based on the fact that he was discharged for being an alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure.  Absent his rehabilitation failure, there was no fundamental reason to process the applicant's request for separation.  The underlying reason for his discharge was his rehabilitation failure.  The only valid narrative reason for separation permitted under that paragraph is "alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure" and the corresponding SPD code is "JPD."

3.  There is no evidence in the applicant's records and the applicant did not provide substantiating evidence that shows he was undergoing a family hardship or that he reported such hardship to his chain of command or solicited help from the support channels available at his installation.  Furthermore, there is no evidence the applicant voluntarily requested separation for hardship.

4.  In view of the foregoing evidence, there is no reason to change his narrative reason for separation.

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)                                         AR20110021320





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110021320



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1