Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/05/10 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant stated, "My discharge was inequitable first because there was no reason listed as to why I received lower than a general discharge. I was not the perfect soldier and far from the worse, I was given an Article 15 early on in 2003 with no other adverse incident/action to my knowledge. "My discharge was also inequitable because I was not liked by the higher-up (sic) in the unit, in my opinion due to my testing positive for a controlled substance on one occasion early in 2003. I was treated like an outkast (sic) after that one occurrence. I was also treated differently after I informed my Captain that I was a sole surviving son and that I may not go on deployment with the unit. There was also an incident where I was past up (sic) for a promotion that I found out in the Army Regulation should have been automatic due to my time in grade and time in service. I tried to transfer out of the unit twice and I was denied for some unknown reason. I just wanted a fresh start with a new unit. I was highly un-motivated after this situation. "Lastly my dicharge was inequitable because it's harmful to me when it comes time for me to apply for jobs that require/ask for discharge papers. Anything lower than a General discharge looks bad to potential employers and arouses concern/alarm. I would hate to possibly be denied employment behind my discharge. "I was reduced in rank from E-3 to E-1 during my discharge process for reasons unknown. Also my contract stated I wasn't required to actively drill as of Jan 07 if my absence becomes a factor." 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: 01113 Chapter: NIF AR: 135-178 Reason: NIF RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: 88th MP Co, Fort Eustis, VA 23604 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF; The applicant stated that he received an Article 15 in 2003. Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 18 Current ENL Date: 010110 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 7 Yrs, 10Mos, 04Days ????? Total Service: 7 Yrs, 10Mos, 04Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR 010110-030210/NA AD 030211-040111/HD (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92A10 Automated Logistical Specialist GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Kuwait (030428-031113) Decorations/Awards: AFRM w M Device, NDSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Newport News, VA 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 which led to his discharge from the Army Reserve. The record indicates that on 13 November 2008, DA HQ, 99th Regional Support Command (RSC), Fort Dix, NJ Order number 08-318-00005, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 13 November 2008, with an under other than conditions discharge. The record contains a properly constituted Order which indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions AR 135-178. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) provides for the separation of enlisted personnel of the Army Reserve. Army policy states that the characterization of service will normally be under other than honorable conditions. The regulation also permitted the characterization of service as general, under honorable conditions. 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 submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The record indicates that on 13 November 2008, DA HQ, 99th Regional Support Command (RSC), Fort Dix, NJ Order number 08-318-00005, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 13 November 2008, with an under other than conditions discharge. All the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. The applicant's contentions concerning differential treatment by his command were carefully considered. However, the analyst is unable to determine whether his contention has merit because the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. 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. Further, that applicant's contention that employment opportunities are not available to him due to his discharge charactization does not provide a basis upon which to upgrade the discharge. The burden of proof remains with the applicant 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. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record. Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears 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: 1 April 2011 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 application; DD Form 214; Certificate of Discharge from Active Duty; DA Separation Order. 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: N/A RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20100015302 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages