Application Receipt Date: 060725 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 with attachment. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 060106 Discharge Received: Date: 060127 Chapter: 9 AR: 635-200 Reason: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure RE: SPD: JPD Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Company, US Army Garrison, Fort Jackson, SC 29207 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 840825 Current ENL Date: 030619 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 7 Mos, 9 Days ????? Total Service: 2 Yrs, 7 Mos, 9 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92Y10 Unit Supply Specialist GT: 101 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: See DD Form 293 with attachment. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Department (SARD) declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure. The unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of alcohol or other drug abuse rehabilitation failure, with an honorable discharge. She was advised of her rights. The applicant waived legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service with an honorable discharge. On 20 January 2006, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of honorable. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 9 contains the authority and outlines the procedures for discharging individuals because of alcohol or other drug abuse. A member who has been referred to the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program (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. Army policy states that an honorable or general discharge is authorized depending on the applicant’s overall record of service. (However, an honorable discharge is required if restricted use information is used in the discharge process). c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the applicant's narrative reason for separation. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was separated due to her inability and or refusal to participate in and successfully complete the Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Department Program (SARD). The evidence further shows that the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of alcohol or other Drug abuse rehabilitation failure. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and that the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Furthermore, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 11 July 2007 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: N/A Witnesses/Observers: N/A Exhibits Submitted: N/A VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change 0 No change 0 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: N/A Other: N/A RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: N/A XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 20 July 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060010365 Applicant Name: Ms. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages