Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 071010 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant in fact states, "I was at basic training and found out that I had anemia. I had no knowledge that I had it. Looking at my past medical records, no record of it was found". II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 070806 Chapter: 8-35c AR: (NGR) 600-200 Reason: Other Designated Physical or Mental Conditions RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: Co E, 2-285th Avn Regt, Phoenix, AZ Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Year/Month: 8306 HOR City, State: Phoenix, AZ Current ENL Date: 061214 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 07Mos, 23Days ????? Total Service: 00 Yrs, 07Mos, 23Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: GED Cert Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ????? V. Post-Discharge Activity 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 her discharge from the Army Reserve. The evidence indicates that on 16 August 2007, Department of the Army and the Air Force, Joint Force Headquarters, Phoenix, Arizona, Orders 228-644 discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective date 06 August 2007, with an uncharacterized discharge. The record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service). It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-35c, NGR 600-200, by reason of other designated physical or mental conditions, with a characterization of service of uncharacterized, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3." b. 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. Chapter 7 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, discharge and separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation. 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. 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 review of all the applicant’s available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue 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 her discharge from the Army Reserve. However, the applicant’s record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) which identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The applicant’s NGB Form 22 shows the applicant, while in entry-level status, was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 35c (f), NGR 600-200, by reason of other designated physical or mental conditions with service uncharacterized. Therefore, the analyst recommends that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 080819 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: None VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change 0 No change 5 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - Reason (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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. X. 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: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 080821 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070013910 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages