Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/01/05 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 080804 Discharge Received: Date: 080828 Chapter: 9 AR: 635-200 Reason: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure RE: SPD: JPD Unit/Location: HHB, 2-377 PFAR, Fort Richardson, AK Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 080227, driving while drunk (071212), and underage drinking (071212); reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $670 pay x 2 months, extra duty for 45 days, and restriction for 45 days (FG). Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 19 Current ENL Date: 071019 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 10Mos, 10Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 01Mos, 03Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-050726-071018/HD Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 13F1P Fire Support Spec GT: 113 EDU: GED Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (061010-071201) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM-W/CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR-2, CAB V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Burlington, WI Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims that he is a volunteer EMT on the city's rescue; and currently a full time student pursuing an Associate Degree in Information Technology. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record indicates that on 10 July 2008, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/ASAP (see DA Form 4466) declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure. On 29 July 2008, 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/ASAP failure, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon his receiving a characterization of service of no less favorable than honorable, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. On 7 August 2008, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicant's record contains a Memorandum of Reprimand (MOR) dated 13 March 2008, for driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol and underage drinking (Administrative). The applicant's record contains a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) dated 20 December 2007, for driving under the influence of alcohol, causing damage to property, fleeing the scene of an accident, and underage drinking (Administrative). 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 during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The analyst noted that 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. The evidence of record establishes the fact that the applicant was properly counseled and afforded a reasonable opportunity to overcome his problems. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue in reference to him being sent to the Warrior Transition Unit (WTU) due to his post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI); however, the evidence of record shows that the applicant was receiving treatment at the Community Mental Health Clinic for his PTSD and TBI; while also enrolled in ASAP due to him driving under the influence of alcohol. While enrollled in ASAP the applicant was cited for driving under the influence and underage drinking and was assessed as a rehabilitation failure. Subsequently, the unit commander initiated separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of alcohol or other drug abuse rehabilitation failure/ASAP failure. Further, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Finally, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the many accomplishments outlined with the application and in the documents with the application. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 10 November 2009 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. 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 discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090017534 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages