Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/05	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant 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?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	NIF   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080516   Chapter: 13    AR: 135-178
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation in the Ready Reserve 	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: 345th Psychological Operations Company, (Tactical), Dallas, TX 

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:  25
Current ENL Date: 061211    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 05Mos, 06Days ?????
Total Service:  		05 Yrs, 04Mos, 17Days the analyst utilized applicant's enlistment contracts, separation orders and DD Form 214s for computation of period of enlistment under review and total service.
Previous Discharges: 	USAR-020717-021022/NA
                                       ADT-021023-030513/HD
                                       USAR-030514-040926/NA
                                        ADT-040927-051101/HD
                                        USAR-051102-060627/HD
                                           (Break In Service)
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91W10 Health Care Spec   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, ARCAM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Austin, TX
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states he is employed as a pediatric nurse

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.  However, on 15 April 2008, a memorandum from the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate, Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command (ABN), indicated that the applicant failed to report for Annual Training (AT) nonparticipant muster on 8 February 2008.  He was served with AT orders and later the notice of separation under AR 135-178, Chapter 13, unsatisfactory participation, and related documents via U.S. mail, but did not respond.  As a result, no separation board was conducted.   The chain of command (at Group) recommended approval of the discharge with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service.  However, the applicant's unit and intermediate commanders did not submit a recommendation due to the non participant muster being initiated and conducted by 2nd Psychological Operations Group.  On 6 May  2008, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 

       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.  Chapter 13, paragraph 13-1 of the regulation, ineffect at the time, governed separation of unsatisfactory participation in the ready reserve.  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 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 documents 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 15 May 2008, DA HQ, Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command, Fort Bragg, NC, Orders 08-136-00014, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date:  16 May 2008, with an under other than 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 and 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.  Further, 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: 13 May 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 1    No change 4
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 AR20080012663
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages