Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/06/09 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant requests an upgrade of her discharge to honorable for the purpose of obtaining educational benefits. She provides three documents for the Board's consideration. 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: Not in File (NIF) Discharge Received: Date: 970515 Chapter: 4 AR: 635-200 Reason: Completion of Required Active Service RE: SPD: MBK Unit/Location: 104th QM Co, Midland, TX 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: 27 Current ENL Date: IADT 970109 Current ENL Term: 00 Years 18 weeks Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 04Mos, 07Days ????? Total Service: 00 Yrs, 08Mos, 17Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR 960829-040831/HD (Concurrent and post service) Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 77F10/Petroleum Supply Spc GT: 96 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Lubbock, TX Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant provided an order that shows she was discharged from the USAR on 31 August 2004 with an honorable characterization of service and had achieved the rank of sergeant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. Her DD Form 214 indicates that she was released from active duty training under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-200 by reason of completion of required active service, with service uncharacterized. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of MBK (i.e., completion of required active service). Following completion of MOS training course, the applicant was released from active duty training, with an effective date of 15 May 1997 and transferred back to the U.S. Army Reserve to complete her service obligation. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 4 of that regulation provided, in pertinent part, for the separation of individuals at completion of required service (i.e., expiration term of service). 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, and the issue and documents she submitted, the analyst recommends that relief be denied in this case. The evidence of record shows that the applicant, while in entry-level status, was released from active duty for training under the provisions of Chapter 4, AR 635-200, by reason of completion of required active service, with service uncharacterized. The characterization of service for Soldiers separated under this provision of the regulation will normally be honorable, unless the Soldier is in entry-level status. A Soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty. Army Regulation 635-200 also provides, except in cases of serious misconduct, that a Soldier’s service will be uncharacterized when separated in entry-level status. For ARNG and USAR Soldiers ordered to IADT/ADT, entry-level status terminates 180 days after the beginning of training. Further, 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. In view of the aforementioned, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and characterization of service were both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 10 March 2010 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090010379 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 pages