Application Receipt Date: 060720 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: 050812 Chapter: NIF AR: 635-200 Reason: NIF RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: US Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Mo, Atch to Commander, HQ US Garrison, Fort Dix, NJ Time Lost: NIF Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: NIF Current ENL Date: 030203/OAD Current ENL Term: 03 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 06Mos, 10Days ????? Total Service: 23 Yrs, 02Mos, 25Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-810629-810914/NA RA-810915-860604/HD USARCG-860605-870324/NA USAR-870325-890726/NA USAR-890727-940324/NA RA-940325-950810/HD USAR-950830-960917/NA RA-960918-991117/HD USAR-991109-030202/NA Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 63B20 (Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic) GT: 107 EDU: BS Overseas: Germany Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAM (2d Award), AGCM, NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR, Army Reserve Components Overseas Training Ribbon (2d Award) 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 specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve. However, on 9 August 2005, AHRC-PAP-E550 Orders D-08-590224, DA, US Army Human Resources Command, 1 Reserve Way, St. Louis, Missouri, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve/Active Guard Reserve, effective date: 12 August 2005, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The regulation establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or absence without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. 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 the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve/Active Guard Reserve. However, on 9 August 2005, AHRC-PAP-E550 Orders D-08-590224, DA, US Army Human Resources Command, 1 Reserve Way, St. Louis, Missouri, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve/Active Guard Reserve, effective date: 12 August 2005, 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: 15 August 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 to deny relief. 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: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 22 August 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060010209 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages