Applicant Name: ?????
Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/10 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: 951115
Discharge Received: Date: 960104 Chapter: 5-3 AR: 135-178
Reason: NIF RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: HHC 28th AVN GP, Arlington, TX
Time Lost: NIF
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF
Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldiers Overall Record
Age at current enlistment: 17
Current ENL Date: 940208 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ?????
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 10Mos, 30Days ?????
Total Service: 1 Yrs, 10Mos, 30Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 96B/Intell Analyst GT: 112 EDU: NIF Overseas: None Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V. Post-Discharge Activity
City, State: Irving, TX
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the Applicant.
VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation
a. Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence shows the applicants record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army Reserve. The evidence of record indicate the applicant was ordered to Initial Active Duty for Training with a report date of 3 July 1995 as per MEPS Dallas Orders 104.1. The record further show that the Commander initiated discharge proceeding citing AR 135-178 for "Refusal to Ship", on 5 November 1995. On 4 January 1996, DA HQS, 90th United States Army Reserve Command, 1920 Harry Wurzbach Highway, San Antonio, TX 78209-6097, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 4 January 1996, with an uncharacterized discharge. The record contains a properly constituted Order as described above. It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-178 with a characterization of service of uncharacterized conditions.
b. Legal Basis for Separation:
Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:
After a careful review of all the applicants military records 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. The analyst determined that the applicants discharge was appropriate because the quality of the service was not consistent with the Armys standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant issue and determined that he met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. The analyst determined that the applicants 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 Boards consideration. Additionally, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 18 September 2009 Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel: None
Witnesses/Observers: None
Exhibits Submitted: None
VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analysts 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 AR20090000711
______________________________________________________________________________
Page 2 of 2 pages
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013808
Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: Not In File (NIF) Discharge Received: Date: 060809 Chapter: 13-1 AR: 135-178 Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: 281st TC Co, Las Cruces, NM Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-78 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070010230
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. The regulation also permitted the characterization of service as under honorable conditions, but did not authorize the characterization of service as honorable. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 31 July 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT...
ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013924
Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard. An enlisted member separated for misconduct which includes unsatisfactory participation will normally be furnished a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009753
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008170
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants 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 | CY2009 | AR20090001836
Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from the United States Army Reserve. Further, the analyst determined that the applicants 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. Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | ar20090006070
Applicant Name: ????? c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicants 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. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008261
Applicant Name: ????? Years Mobilized for 365 days Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 02Mos, 09Days ????? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve.
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080010966
Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. However, the applicants record contains a properly constituted Order which indicates that the applicant was discharged UP AR 135-178 with a general under honorable conditions discharge. 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...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000367
Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/11/24 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.