Application Receipt Date: 060710 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting documents. 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: 060430 Chapter: 12 AR: 135-178 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 81st Regional Readiness Command, Birmingham, AL 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 DOB: 720806 Current ENL Date: 050628 Current ENL Term: 03 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 10Mos, 03Days ????? Total Service: 11 Yrs, 05Mos, 27Days ????? Previous Discharges: USN-910905-960704/HD USNR-960705-990428/NA ARNG-990429-020428/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: NIF GT: NIF EDU: NIF Overseas: NIF Combat: NIF Decorations/Awards: NIF V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The applicant’s record is void of the complete facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve. However, the records shows that the applicant did acknowledge recipt of the Notification of Separation Proceedings Under Army Regulation 135-178, Chapter 12, dated 8 December 2005 and that he excercised his right to consult with counsel in preparation of his request for a conditional waiver of his right to a hearing before an administrative separation board. On 30 March 2006, Orders 06-089-00100, DA, HQ, 81st Regional Readiness Command, Birmingham, Alabama, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 30 April 2006, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the grade of PV1. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) provides for the separation of enlisted personnel of the Army Reserve and Army National Guard. Chapter 12, paragraph 12-1 of the regulation, ineffect at the time, governed separation of misconduct. When discharged under this provision, Army policy states that the characterization of service wil 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 military records for the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst recommend that relief be denied in this case. The applicant’s record is void of all the facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve. However, on 30 March 2006, Orders 06-089-00100, DA, HQ, 81st Regional Readiness Command, Birmingham, Alabama, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 30 March 2006, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. This document identifies the characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government Regularity in the discharge process. The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the applicant has provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. In the absence of corroborated 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. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 6 June 2007 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA 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 not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner 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: NA XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 21 June 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060009753 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages