Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/11/24 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached document 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: NIF Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 071030 Chapter: NIF AR: 135-178 Reason: NIF RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: 244th EN Bn, Denver, CO Time Lost: NIF Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 19 Current ENL Date: 060907 Current ENL Term: NIF Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 10Mos, 24Days ????? Total Service: 05 Yrs, 02Mos, 06Days the analyst utilized the applicant's enlistment contract, separation orders and DD Form 214 for computing the period of enlistment under review and total service. Previous Discharges: RA-010807-050818/HD USARCG-050819-060906/NA Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 88M10/Motor Transport Operator GT: 112 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Southwest Asia Combat: Iraq (040317-050316) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, AGCM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR (All Prior Service) V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Denver, CO Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the United States Army Reserve. On 12 October 2007, DA, HQ, 96th Regional Readiness Command, Salt Lake City, UT, Orders 05-007-00066, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 12 October 2007, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. 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 general, under honorable conditions. 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, the issues and document he submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the United States Army Reserve. However, on 12 October 2007, DA, HQ, 96th Regional Readiness Command, Salt Lake City, UT, Orders 07-285-00001, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 12 October 2007, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. This document identifies the characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. Barring evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue; however, if the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist. Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes. Finally, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain the specific documents that would indicate the reason for his separation from the United States Army Reserve. If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the applicant 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. 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: 9 September 2009 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: None ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090000367 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages