Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 070720 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: NIF Chapter: 13 AR: 135-178 Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: C Co, 989th Eng Bn (CBT)(HVY) WS5PCO, Monclova, OH 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 Year/Month: 1979/10 HOR City, State: Toledo, OH Current ENL Date: 990426 Current ENL Term: 08 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 02Days ????? Total Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 02Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 51B10/Carpentry and Masonry Specialist GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant’s reassigment in the United States Army Reserve are not contained in the available records. However, the evidence of record shows that on 12 February 2002, Orders 02-043-015, DA, HQ, 88th Regional Support Command, Fort Snelling, Minnesota, reassigned the applicant in the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 27 February 2002, to the USAR Control Group AT (WONJAA), 1 Reserve Way, St Louis, Mo, by reason of unsatisfactory participation. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) provides for the separation of enlisted personnel of the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. When discharged under this provision, Army policy states that the characterization of service will normally be under other than honorable conditions. The regulation also permitted the characterization of service as under honorable conditions, but did not authorize the characterization of service as honorable. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issue she submitted, the analyst recommends that relief be denied in this case. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to her reassigment in the United States Army Reserve. However, the record contains an order dated 12 February 2002, that reassigned the applicant in the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 27 February 2002, to the USAR Control Group AT (WONJAA), 1 Reserve Way, St Louis, Mo, for unsatifactory participation and the analyst presumed Government Regularity in the applicant's reassignment process. Futhermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue and the supporting documentation, however, the analyst did not found the said documentation sufficiently mitigating to warrant a change to the applicant's narrative reason for reassignment to the USAR Control Group AT. Additionally, 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. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the narrative reason for reassignment of the applicant was both proper and equitable and recommends that the Board deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 25 July 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 0 No change 0 - Character Change 2 No change 3 - 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 narrative reason for reassignment was both proper and equitable, and voted to deny relief. 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: NA XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 31 July 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070010230 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages