Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2008/09/22 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 050630 Chapter: 13 AR: 635-200 Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: 307th MP Co, (CBT SPT), New Kensington, PA Time Lost: None Listed Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 17 Current ENL Date: 011019 Current ENL Term: 08 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 03 Yrs, 08Mos, 12Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 08Mos, 12Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: NIF GT: NIF EDU: NIF Overseas: None, however, the applicant makes reference to having served in Iraq, in the "Correction Information" section of his DD Form 293, dates of service unknown. Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NIF V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Bronx, NY 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 United States Army Reserve. However, the record indicates that on 13 June 2005, DA, HQ, 99th Regional Readiness Command, Coraopolis, PA, Orders 05-164-00031, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 30 June 2005, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 135-178. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-78 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve. Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the USAR. Paragraph 13-1 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 military records during the period of enlistment under review and the issues 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 United States Army Reserve. However, on 13 June 2005, DA, HQ, 99th Regional Readiness Command, Coraopolis, Pennsylvania, issued Orders 05-164-00031, which discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective date: 30 June 2005, 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. Barring 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, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue, however, the available record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the analyst determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. Additionally, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain the specific documents that would indicate the reason for his separation from the United States Army Reserve. If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action for the Board’s consideration. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 2 July 2009 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. 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. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 1 No change 4 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080015466 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages