Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/14 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 070817 Chapter: NIF AR: 135-178 Reason: NIF RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: NIF 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: NIF Current ENL Date: 051026 Current ENL Term: NIF Years ????? Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 28Mos, 12Days ????? Total Service: 1 Yrs, 28Mos, 12Days ????? Previous Discharges: NIF Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: NIF GT: NIF EDU: NIF Overseas: NIF Combat: NIF Decorations/Awards: NIF V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: El Paso, TX Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant. 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 his discharge from the Army Reserve. The record indicates that on 20 August 2007, DA HQS, 90th Regional Readiness Command, North Little Rock, AR, Orders number 07-232-00030, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 17 August 2007, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The record contains a properly constituted Order which indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-178, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 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 and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. On 20 August 2007, DA HQS, 90th Regional Readiness Command, North Little Rock, AR, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 17 August 2007, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. All the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. Furthermore, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. 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. Additionally, if reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine 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 if appropriate. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. However, the analyst is unable to determine whether his contentions have merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. 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. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record. 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: 22 February 2010 Location: Dallas, TX 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 AR20090006070 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages