IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	29 January 2014

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130010713
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the examiner’s Discussion and Recommendation that follows, the Board noted that the government introduced a document into the discharge process revealing the applicant had self-referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for substance abuse.  This is limited use information as defined in AR 600-85.  Use of this information mandates award of an honorable discharge.  Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to honorable.  The Board found the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and voted not to change it.  



      
      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge from general, under honorable conditions to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he went to alcohol treatment at the VA and he passed the requirements.  He realizes that the civilian life is not for him.  He would love to reenlist and start all over. He realizes he would be better at serving his country rather than the civilian life.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		6 June 2013
b. Discharge received:			General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			16 November 2009
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE:		Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, Chapter 9            						AR 635-200, JPD, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:			Co D, 264th Med BN, 32d Med Bde, Fort Sam							Houston, TX	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:  	6 October 2008 (15 July 2008, 8 years in USAR at						time of enlistment per contract)
g. Current Enlistment Service:  	1 year, 1 month, 11 days
h. Total Service:			1 year, 1 month, 11 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	None
m. GT Score:				102
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		None
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the USAR on 15 July 2008, for a period of 8 years.  He reported for active duty basic training on 6 October 2008.  He was 24 years old at the time he joined the Army Reserves and was a high school graduate.  When his discharge proceedings were initiated he was serving at Sheppard Air Force Base, TX.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The evidence of record indicates that on 30 June 2009, the applicant self referred to the 
ADAPT clinic.  Following an assessment and reviewing the criteria for Alcohol Abuse Dependence per the DSM-IV, he met the criteria for an alcohol dependence diagnosis.  The applicant initially was admitted with partial hospitalization to start a 28 day program on 15 July 2009.  The treatment was later elevated to level 3, which was partial hospitalization with boarding to begin on 19 July 2009.  On 10 August 2009, the applicant was considered a program failure for showing inability to demonstrate adequate coping skills deeming him a program failure in the area of impulsivity, and showing inability to demonstrate adequate coping skills related to anxiety.  

2.  On 29 September 2009, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP), declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure.  

3.  On 9 October 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, for being an alcohol rehabilitation failure based on him being declared an ADAPT failure by clinical officials.  

4.  The unit commander advised the applicant of his rights and recommended his discharge from the Army with a service characterization of general, under honorable conditions and waiver of any rehabilitation measures.

5.  On 21 October 2009, the applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

6.  On 3 November 2009, the separation authority approved the proposed action and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 

7.  The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence of actions under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 

8.  The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.   

9.  The applicant was separated on 16 November 2009, under Army Regulation 
635-200, Chapter 9, for alcohol rehabilitation failure, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an SPD code of JPD and a reentry code of 4.  His DD Form 214 shows he was an E-3/PFC at the time of his discharge.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  ADAPT program failure memorandum, dated 23 September 2009.

2.  Five negative counseling statements dated between 13 May 2009 and 30 September 2009 for recommendations for discharge (2), ADAPT failure, being late for formation, and for being late to the platoon sergeants office.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 15 April 2013, and a DD Form 214.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided with the application.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel and outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse.  

2.  A member who has been referred to the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) for alcohol or 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.  

3.  Army policy states that an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service.  However, an honorable discharge is required if limited use information is used in the discharge process.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s military records and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. 

2.  The applicant was enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) and was aware of the consequences of any action which would demonstrate any inability or refusal to participate in, cooperate in, or successfully complete such a program.  As a result of the applicant’s actions and after consultation with the drug and alcohol abuse counselor, the command declared the Soldier a rehabilitation failure.  

3.  The evidence of record confirms the fact the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems.  The general, under honorable conditions discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.

4.  The applicant's contends he is receiving ADAPT treatment with the VA and meeting the rehabilitative standards.  However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service.  Moreover, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs which is applied in all Army discharge reviews unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption.  There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted.  The applicant’s statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. 

5.  The applicant desires to rejoin the Military Service.  However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on Army Regulation 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of 4.  An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. 

6.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review	  Date:  29 January 2014    Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel:  None

Board Vote:
Character Change:  5	No Change:  0
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		Yes
Change Characterization to:	Honorable
Change Reason to:			No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					NA




Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130010713



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1