IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  4 December 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120009382 


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 that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his general discharge was unjust because it was based on minor infractions. 

3.  The applicant provides a one-page letter explaining his application and a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). 

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 13 August 1983 for a period of 3 years and training as a motor transport operator.  He completed his one station unit training as a motor transport operator at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and was transferred to Fort Rucker, Alabama, for his first duty assignment.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 13 September 1984.

3.  On 25 February 1985, he was transferred to Korea for assignment to the
2d Supply and Transportation Battalion.

4.  On 16 April 1985, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failure to go to his place of duty and being disrespectful in language towards a superior commissioned officer.

5.  On 25 April 1985, he was command referred and enrolled in Track II of the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (ADAPCP) for alcohol abuse.

6.  On 13 May 1985, NJP was imposed against the applicant for violating the unit pass policy and curfew.

7.  On 20 June 1985, the clinical director indicated that since the applicant’s enrollment he had displayed an apathetic attitude towards his treatment.  He had been observed consuming alcohol on at least three occasions and was intoxicated during a unit alert.  The chain of command and the clinical director determined that the applicant showed no potential for further service and deemed him a rehabilitative failure.  He was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the chain of command.

8.  On 1 July 1985, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 9-2, alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure. 

9.  After consulting with defense counsel the applicant elected to submit a statement in his own behalf in which he requested to be allowed to complete his enlistment.  He also requested treatment in a Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center.

10.  The appropriate authority approved the recommendation for discharge on  13 July 1985 and directed that he be furnished a General Discharge Certificate.

11.  Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 25 July 1985 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, due to alcohol abuse – rehabilitation failure.  He had served 1 year, 10 months, and 13 days of active service.
12.  There is no evidence in his official records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 9 of that regulation contains the authority and outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol and/or drug abuse.  A member may be separated because of inability or refusal to participate in, or successfully complete a rehabilitation program if there is a lack of potential for continued Army service and rehabilitation efforts are no longer practical.  Characterization of service will be determined solely by the Soldier’s military record that includes the soldier’s behavior and performance during the current enlistment.  

14.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in accordance with applicable regulations with no evidence of any violations of the applicant’s rights.  Accordingly, he was given the proper narrative reason for his separation and he has provided no evidence to justify an upgrade of his discharge.

2.  The applicant’s contentions have been noted; however, his overall record of service does not constitute fully honorable service.  

3.  Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to grant his request for an upgrade of his discharge.  

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)                                         AR20120009382





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120009382



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1