Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/08	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The Applicant states that the discharge on record is innacurate according to the paperwork he received from his unit.  He provides no documentation to support his request.

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: Not In File (NIF)
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070919   Chapter: NIF    AR: 135-178
Reason: NIF	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: 180th Trans Co, Muskegon, MI 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 040301    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 06Mos, 18Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 06Mos, 18Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	OAD 041104-060124/HD (Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 88M10/Motor Transp Opr   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (050101-051225)
Decorations/Awards: AAM, GWOTSM, GWOTEM, ICM, AGCM, AFRM, CAB, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Brighton, MI
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence shows the applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army Reserve.  The record indicates that on 19 September 2007, Department of the Army, HQ, 88th Regional Readiness Command, Fort Snelling, Minnesota, Orders 07-262-00053, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 19 September 2007, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The record contains a properly constituted order and it does not indicate the specific reason for the discharge.  

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 135-78 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve.  Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the USAR.  Paragraph 13-1 of that regulation provides in pertinent part that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant.   Army Regulation 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a 1 year period.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records.  On 19 September 2007, Department of the Army, HQ, 88th Regional Readiness Command, Fort Snellin, MN, discharged the applicant from the USAR, effective 19 September 2007, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  Furthermore, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain all the specific documents that would indicate the reason for the separation action from the United States Army.  If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 13 May 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

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 2    No change 3
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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080012693
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 2 pages