Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 2009/01/05	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting 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: 990919   Chapter: NIF    AR: 135-178
Reason: NIF	   RE:  NIF   SPD: NA   Unit/Location: Co E, 317th In Rgt, Suffolk, VA 

Time Lost: None

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:  37
Current ENL Date: 961103    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 10Mos, 16Days ?????
Total Service:  		19 Yrs, 06Mos, 01Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR 770326-830325/HD
                                       USAR 830326-870130/HD
                                       USAR 870131-901208/HD
                                       USAR 901209-961102/HD
Highest Grade: E7		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 72E Telcom Center Operations   GT: 109   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Raleigh, NC
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

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.  The record indicates that on 19 September 1999, Department of the Army, Headquarters, 80th Division (Institutional Training), Richmond, Virginia, Orders 262-5, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 19 September 1996, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge under the authority of AR 135-178.  

       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.  Chapter 12 of this regulation 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, and convictions by civil authorities.  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 records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue and documents 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 Army Reserve.  However, the applicant’s record does contain a properly constituted Order which was authenticated by the appropriate military authority.  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.  The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the type of discharge he received from the U.S. Army Reserve.  Furthermore, the analyst noted that 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, 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.  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: 16 October 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No X 

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: X  No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090001836
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages