Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 071004 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The Applicant in fact states: "I now realize what the army could have done for me. I want to serve my country the best that I can. I made mistakes in my military career, and now I want to make up for them. The army is the only thing that I want to do. I want to provide my family with the best life that I can, and the army can help me do that. I basically want a second chance to serve my country, and I'm hoping that I will have the oppurtunity to do that." 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: NIF Chapter: NIF AR: NIF Reason: NIF RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: HHC, 467th Eng Bn, Millington, TN 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 Year/Month: 8612 HOR City, State: Dyersburg, TN Current ENL Date: 050328 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 02Mos, 17Days ????? Total Service: 01 Yrs, 02Mos, 17Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: NIF GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NIF V. Post-Discharge Activity 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 that led to his discharge from the Army. The record indicates that on 12 May 2006, Department of Army, Headquarters, 81st Regional Readness Command, Birmingham, Alabama, Orders 06-132-00004, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 12 June 2006, with a general under honorable conditions discharge and assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), St Louis, Missouri to complete his statutory obligation. The record does not contain a properly constituted DD Form 214. b. Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard. Chapter 7 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, discharge and separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation. 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. An enlisted member separated for misconduct which includes unsatisfactory participation will normally be furnished a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178. 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 he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army Reserve. The applicant’s record does not contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 which identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. 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 if necessary. 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: 15 August 2008 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: None 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 1 No change 4 - 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, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, 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: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 15 August 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070013592 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 4 pages