Application Receipt Date: 071204 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request 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? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 050110 (060111) Discharge Received: Date: 060214 Chapter: 9 AR: 635-200 Reason: Drug Rehabilitation Failure RE: SPD: JPC Unit/Location: D Co, 2-12 IN, Fort Carson, CO Time Lost: AWOL for 2 days (051116-051117), mode of return unknown. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 760603 Current ENL Date: 040204 Current ENL Term: 3 Years Item 12a on the applicant's DD Form 214, date entered active duty this period is incorrect, should read 040204, see enlistment contract. Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 09 Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 00 Mos, 09 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B10 Infantryman GT: NIF EDU: 14 Years Overseas: Korea/Southwest Asia Combat: Kuwait/Iraq (040808-050730) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR, CIB V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant submitted documents which shows that he completed the tier-1, 5 week residential substance abuse treatment track and the PTSD treatment program, 17 February 2006 and 5 April 2006 respectively. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 30 November 2005, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/ADAPCP declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure. On 10 January 2005 (060111), the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 9, AR 635-200, by reason of drug rehabilitation/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, 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 24 January 2006, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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 several mitigating factors that would merit a partial upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to fully honorable. The analyst does not condone the applicant’s misconduct; however, the evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The analyst found that the length and quality of the applicant's service; to include his combat service, the unit commander's recommendation for an honorable characterization of service, and the Standard Form 600 (Rev.), which shows the applicant was diagnosed with chronic post traumatic stress disorder on (051219), mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 6 February 2008 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 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 characterization of service is too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The Board determined that the length and quality of the applicant’s service; to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant partial relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable. However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 7 February 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070017787 Applicant Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages