Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/09/25	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "My discharge was inequitable because it was based on one incident in 42 months of service with no other adverse action.  I recieved an article 15 for that action.  I can not get back to the service.  I need a opportunity.  Is very important for my family and myself.  LMy record show I was a soldier with potential.  I need this, is very important for me be part of the ARMY."

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: 070219   Chapter: 12       AR: 135-178
Reason: NIF	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: 108th Hq Division (IT), Charlotte, NC 

Time Lost: NIF

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The applicant mentions in his statement dated 21 September 2008, that he received an Article 15 and was reduced from E-5 to E-4.

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  26
Current ENL Date: 050415    Current ENL Term: 5 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 10Mos, 05Days ?????
Total Service:  		04 Yrs, 10Mos, 05Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA-020415-050414/HD
                                        (Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63B1P Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic   GT: 115   EDU: 12/8   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (030214-040215)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Guaynabo, PR
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 his discharge from the United States Army Reserve.  However, on 20 January 2007, DA, HQ, 108th Division (Institutional Training), Charlotte, North Carolina, Orders 07-020-00007, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date:  19 February 2007.
       

       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 12, paragraph 12-1 of the regulation, ineffect at the time, governed separation of misconduct.  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, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  However, on 20 January 2007, DA, HQ, 108th Division (Institutional Training), Charlotte, North Carolina, Orders 07-020-00007, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 19 February 2007, 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 issues; however, 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 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, regarding the applicant's issue in reference to him reenlisting in the Army, the analyst found that at the time of discharge the applicant was issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  In accordance with AR 601-210, Separation Program Designator (SPD)/Reentry Eligibility (RE) Codes Cross-Reference Table dated 15 June 2006, AR 601-210, determines Regular Army (RA) and United States Army Reserve (USAR) reentry eligibility, and provides regulatory guidance on the RE codes.  An under other than honorable conditions discharge requires a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "4."  An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  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: 8 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: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080015608
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages