Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080015466
Original file (AR20080015466.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/09/22	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed 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: 050630   Chapter: 13       AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: 307th MP Co, (CBT SPT), New Kensington, PA 

Time Lost: None Listed

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:  17
Current ENL Date: 011019    Current ENL Term: 08 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 08Mos, 12Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 08Mos, 12Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: NIF   GT: NIF   EDU: NIF   Overseas: None, however, the applicant makes reference to having served in Iraq, in the "Correction Information" section of his DD Form 293, dates of service unknown.   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NIF

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Bronx, NY
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 United States Army Reserve.  However, the record indicates that on 13 June 2005, DA, HQ, 99th Regional Readiness Command, Coraopolis, PA, Orders 05-164-00031, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 30 June 2005, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-178.
       
       
       
       

       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 military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issues he 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 his discharge from the United States Army Reserve.  However, on 13 June 2005, DA, HQ, 99th Regional Readiness Command, Coraopolis, Pennsylvania, issued Orders 05-164-00031, which discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date:  30 June 2005, 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, the available record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, the analyst determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  Additionally, 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 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: 2 July 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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080015466
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090011150

    Original file (AR20090011150.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, in review of the applicant’s available service record, the analyst found that his prior or subsequent service did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submittedthe following documents: DD Form 214, dated (040319); DD Form 215, dated 9041208); Permanent Orders Number 308-02, dated (031103); and Discharge Orders, dated (060613). Board Discussion, Determination, and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008979

    Original file (AR20090008979.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) provides for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008843

    Original file (AR20090008843.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) provides for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. 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 and the issues he submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008170

    Original file (AR20090008170.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. 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 document submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant contends she was being discharged for excessive absences from unit drills and this was a mistake because...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | ar20080007470

    Original file (ar20080007470.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application Receipt Date: 2008/05/07 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. 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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090004668

    Original file (AR20090004668.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 149 and supporting documents submitted by the applicant. It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 13-1, AR 135-178, by reason of unsatisfactory participation, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Reentry Codes (RE) are provided to active duty members on military discharge documents (DD Form 214, Record of Discharge) and determine...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080004614

    Original file (AR20080004614.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 several mitigating factors that would merit a change to the applicant's narrative reason for reassignment to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement), from his prior unit of assignment, 339th MC Co HUB, Oakdale, PA, by reason of unsatisfactory participant. The analyst...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090002983

    Original file (AR20090002983.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The unit commander's notification letter to the applicant initiating separation action from the United States Army Reserve, the applicant's chain of command's recommendation for approval of the separation action and his election of rights signed by the applicant and an officer from the Judge Advocate General's office are not part of the available record, and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The board recommended that the applicant be separated with a...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070017649

    Original file (AR20070017649.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003091767

    Original file (AR2003091767.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data NONE Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. On 6 January 2003, the applicant was discharged. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION SECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B -...