Application Receipt Date: 060518	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: ?????

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant stated, "I am requesting an upgrade so it will be possible for me to return to duty in the Army National Guard."

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: 940916
Discharge Received:     Date: 940916   
Chapter: 9    AR: 635-200
Reason: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure
RE:     SPD: JPD
Unit/Location: Company C, 5th Battalion, 87th Infantry Regiment, Fort Davis, Panama 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 940910-failed to go to his appointed place of duty on (940715); disobedience of a lawful command from a CPT on (940725); drunk and disorderly on (940725); assaulted a PV2 on (940725); disobedience of a lawful order from a SGT on (940725); disobedience of a lawful command from a LTC on (940810); (Field Grade).

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  641126  
Current ENL Date: 920721    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  14 weeks
Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 2 Mos, 8 Days ?????
Total Service:  2 Yrs, 2 Mos, 8 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E-3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10, Infantryman   GT: 120   EDU: Associates Degree   Overseas: Panama   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: Six letters of reference, transcripts from a local community college, volunteer work as a rescue squad paramedic, employment reference. 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 26 August 1994, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/ADAPCP declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure.  On 16 September 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 or other drug abuse rehabilitation 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 did not submit a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  On 16 September 1994, the separation authority approved the discharge action 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, his issue and the independent documents he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  While the applicant's misconduct 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 analyst found that the time that has elasped since his discharge and his post service accomplishments, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  However, the narrative reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable and the analyst recommends to the Board not to change it. 
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 21 March 2007              
Location: Washington, D.C.

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     No change    (Character)
		 			       	Change     No change    (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 was too harsh, and as a result it is now inequitable.  The Board found that the length of the applicant’s service, his post service accomplishments and the time that has elapsed since his discharge, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant 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. John Zangas, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: None
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: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 23 March 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060007084

Applicant Name:  Mr.       
______________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 6 pages