Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 07/10/04 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and documents submitted by the applicant. 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: 050825 Chapter: NIF AR: 135-178 Reason: NIF RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: 421st QM Co, Fort Valley, GA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Year/Month: 9112 HOR City, State: Alamo, GA Current ENL Date: NIF Current ENL Term: NIF Years ????? Current ENL Service: NIF Yrs, NIFMos, NIFDays ????? Total Service: 01 Yrs, 03Mos, 10Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-010101-020412/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 88M Motor Transportation Ops GT: 89 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AGCM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: Not 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 that led to her discharge from the Army. The record indicates that on 24 August 2005, Department of the Army Headquarters, 81st Regional Readiness Command, Birmingham, AL, Orders 05-236-00082, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 24 August 2005, with a General, under honorable conditions discharge. The record indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR/135-178. The specific reason of her discharge is not contained in the available record. b. Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-91 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard. Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army Reserve National Guard. Paragraph 8-27(g) of that regulation provides in pertinent part that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant. Army Regulation 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a 1 year period. 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 records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records. On 24 August 2005, the United States Army Reserve, Birmingham, Alabama, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 24 August 2005, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The record contains an Order Report of Separation. It indicates that the applicant was discharged by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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 analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 13 August 2008 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: Proper Improper 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. 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: ????? XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 21 August 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070013583 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages