Application Receipt Date: 06/10/11 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 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: 94/04/20 Discharge Received: Date: 940509 Chapter: 9 AR: 635-200 Reason: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure RE: SPD: JPD Unit/Location: Compamy A, 3rd Battalion, 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne), Fort Bragg, NC 28307 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: 64/04/05 Current ENL Date: 91/06/24 Current ENL Term: 4 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 10Mos, 16Days ????? Total Service: 7 Yrs, 04Mos, 16Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR- 88/03/10 - 88/08/29 HD RA - 83/01/06-87/01/05 HD Highest Grade: E6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 18C30 (Special Operations Engineer) GT: 120 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Korea (84/03/21-85/03/20) Combat: DD 214 indicates award of a CIB and an AFEM Decorations/Awards: ASR, AGCM, OSR, NPDM, AFEM, CIB, EIB, Parachute Badge, Special Forces Tab, Honduran Parachute Badge V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states he has successfully completed out patient Alcohol Abuse treatment and participated in after care and is currently attending college to earn a nursing degree. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 15 April 1994 the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/ADAPCP declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure. On 20 April 1994, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of alcohol rehabilitation failure, with a general discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant consulted with 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 service. The separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 9 May 1994 the applicant was discharged from the Army. 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 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. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his alcohol rehabilitation failure.. While the applicant's rehabilitation failure is not condoned, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable. The overall length and quality of the applicant's service and the time that has elapsed since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. However, the reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable. Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.” An RE code of “4” can not be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 28 November 2007 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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 5 No change 0 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation ????? Case report reviewed and verified by: Chuck Busick, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: ????? XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 30 November 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060014469 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 4 pages