Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/10/17 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: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 001031 Chapter: 9 AR: 135-178 & NGB-ARP, Appendix A, Paragraph 1-26g(3) Reason: Defective Enlistment Agreement RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: B Btry, 1-115th FA Bn, Shelbyville, TN 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: 18 Current ENL Date: 990616 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 04Mos, 15Days ????? Total Service: 01 Yrs, 04Mos, 15Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: 11 years Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states that he has graduated from High School. 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 Army National Guard and the United States Army Reserve. The record indicates that on 5 February 2001, Hqs, Tennesse Army National Guard (STARC), Houston Barracks, P.O. Box 41502, Nashville, Tennesse, Orders 036-075, discharged the Applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective 31 October 2000 (VOAG), with an uncharacterized discharge. The Applicant's NGB Form 22 states the Applicant was discharged under the authority of Memo, NGB-ARP, Appendix A, paragraph 1-26g(3) & *Chapter 9, AR 135-178 by reason of a Defective Enlistment Agreement. b. Legal Basis for Separation: AR 135-178, Chapter 7 provides additional detail regarding circumstances which exist when an enlistment is determined to be defective. Additionally, for ARNGUS and USAR Soldiers, entry-level status begins upon enlistment in the ARNG or USAR. For Soldiers ordered to IADT for one continuous period, it terminates 180 days after beginning training. For Soldiers ordered to IADT for the split or alternate training option, it terminates 90 days after beginning Phase II advanced individual training (AIT). c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of 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 his discharge from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army. 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 Memo, NGB-ARP, Appendix A, paragraph 1-26g(3) & *Chapter 9, AR 135-178 by reason of a Defective Enlistment Agreement, with service uncharacterized. Furthermore, 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 Army National Guard and 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. Additionally, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 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. * The analyst determined that the reference to Chapter 9, AR 135-178 was entered in error; the correct reference for Defective Enlistments is Chapter 7, AR 135-178. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 19 August 2009 Location: Washington,D.C. 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 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 AR20080016136 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 pages