Application Receipt Date: 060915 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD form 293. 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: 041013 Chapter: 12 AR: 135-178 Reason: Misconduct RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: 311th Theater Signal Command USAR Element, Fort Meade, MD 20755 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: 590223 Current ENL Date: 021028 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 11 Mos, 16 Days calculated from discharge orders 04-287-00001 and enlistment contract. Total Service: 07 Yrs, 06 Mos, 19 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-700900-791000/NA RA-791004-850506/HD USAR-850506-Refrad Highest Grade: E2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 71L10 Admin Spec GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad 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 specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve. However, on 13 October 2004, Orders 04-287-00001, DA, HQ and HQ, 311th Theater Signal Command, Fort Meade, MD, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 13 October 2004, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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 and the issue 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. However, on 13 October 2004, Orders 04-287-00001, DA, HQ and HQ, 311th Theater Signal Command, Fort Meade, MD, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 13 October 2004, with a general, under 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. Furthermore, If the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist. Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remainsboth proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 13 June 2007 Location: Atlanta, GA Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: Na Witnesses/Observers: NA????? Exhibits Submitted: None 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 ????? No change ????? - Character Change ????? No change ????? - 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, hearing his testimony, and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: ????? Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060013142 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 5 pages