Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/06/30	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 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: 060701   Chapter: NIF      AR: NIF
Reason: NIF	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: B Co, 980th Eng Bn, San Antonio, TX 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: 010202    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	5 Yrs, 5Mos, 1Days ?????
Total Service:  		5 Yrs, 5Mos, 1Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	NIF
Highest Grade: PFC		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: NIF   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: NIF   Combat: NIF (040407-050206)
Decorations/Awards: CAB 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided by applicant

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.  The record indicates that on 2 June 2006, Department of the Army, Headquarters, 88th Regional Readiness Command, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111,Orders 06-153-00083, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 1 July 2006, with a general under honorable conditions discharge.  

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
             Army Regulation 135-178 provides for the separation of members of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve when it is determined that a service member is unqualified for further military service by reason of unsatisfactory performance.  The service of a member separated under this provision of Army Regulation 135-178 will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by his or her military record.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records, and the issue  submitted with the application, 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 the former Soldier’s discharge from the Army.  The applicant’s record does not contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).  The analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain all the specific documents that would indicate the reason for the separation action from the United States Army and the analyst presumed Government Regularity in the discharge process.   Furthermore, the record does not support the issue that the applicant suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  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.   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.Therefore, the analyst determined 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: 04 December 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

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 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5

								         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: No change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: ?????
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090011438
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 2 pages