Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/12/18	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting 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: 090608
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 090623   Chapter: 9    AR: 635-200
Reason: Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure	   RE:     SPD: JPD   Unit/Location: A Co, 2-502d Inf Reg, Ft Campbell, KY 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 090409, wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor incapacitated for the proper performance of duty, (090326); reduction to E1, forfeiture of $699 pay per month for two months, one month suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before (091009), extra duty 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: 060608    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  19 weeks
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 00Mos, 16Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 00Mos, 16Days Moral waiver approved for enlistment
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B10 Infantryman   GT: 115   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (071012-081117)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NSDM, GWOTSM, ICMw/CS, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Eddyville, KY
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record indicates that on 26 March 2009, the unit commander in consultation with the Clinical Director/ADAPCP declared the applicant a rehabilitation failure.  On 24 August 2009, 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 in that he failed to maintain the agreement with ASAP to not consume alcohol by reporting to the unit under the influence of alcohol and for also receiving a FG Article 15 for prior overindulgence on (090409), 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 submited a statement in his own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       On 10 June 2009, 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, under honorable conditions 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 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 Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Program 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.  
       
       Further, 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. 
        
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and noted that the record does not support the issue that the applicant suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant.  However, the analyst does acknowledge the diagnosis of ETOH dependence with removal of PTSD outlined in the documents with his application from Tennessee Valley HCS dated (091022).  
       
       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: 1 February 2010         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: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090021836
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages