Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/28	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: 070212   Chapter: 12       AR: 135-178
Reason: NIF	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: 89th Regional Readiness Command, Wichita, KS 

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:  20
Current ENL Date: 010425    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	05 Yrs, 09Mos, 18Days ?????
Total Service:  		05 Yrs, 09Mos, 18Days the analyst utilized applicant's enlistment contract and separation orders for computing the period of enlistment under review and total service.
Previous Discharges: 	AD-030127-040126/NA
                                         (Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A10 Automated Logistics Spec   GT: NIF   EDU: 13 Years   Overseas: NIF   Combat: NIF
Decorations/Awards: NIF

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Memphis, TN
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims that she is employed as a certified nursing assistant at the Center for Comprehensive Service Facility.

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 February 2007, DA, HQ, 89th Regional Readiness Command, Wichita, KS, Orders 07-043-00006, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date:  12 February 2007, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel of the U.S. Army Reserve.  Chapter 12 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without leave.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a general, 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 military records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and document she submitted, 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 February 2007, DA, HQ, 89th Regional Readiness Command, Wichita, KS, Orders 07-043-00006, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date:  12 February 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 the 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 applicants issue, even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the available circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Further, the analyst noted the many accomplishments outlined in the documents with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s available service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  Finally, 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.  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: 5 June 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 AR20080013550
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages