Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2010/05/07 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant, states in effect, that he is requesting an upgrade of his discharge to honorable because he recently relocated, has found a USAR Military Police unit and now has his priorities straight. 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: 100308 Chapter: 13 AR: 135-178 Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: 396th EN Co, Ashland, KY Time Lost: None 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: 18 Current ENL Date: 080528 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 09Mos, 10Days ????? Total Service: 01 Yrs, 09Mos, 10Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 21B10/Combat Engineer Spc GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NIF V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Washington, DC 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 which led to his discharge from the Army Reserve. The record indicates that on 26 February 2010, DA HQS, 81st Regional Readiness Command, Fort Jackson, SC, Orders number 10-057-00132, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 8 March 2010, with an under other than conditions discharge. The record contains a properly constituted Order which indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions AR 135-178, for Unsatisfactory Participation. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 governs 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, however, 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 submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. On 26 February 2010, DA HQS, 81st Regional Readiness Command, Fort Jackson, SC, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 8 March 2010, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. All the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. The applicant contends that he is now ready to rejoin and has found a unit near his place of residence. However, if the applicant wants to rejoin the USAR, he should contact the local recruiter to determine 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 if appropriate. The burden of proof remains with the applicant 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. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the evidence is not available in the official record. Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears 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: 10 January 2011 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: Memorandum for record, recruiter's letter, IG action requestdischarge order. 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 (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 Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20100014514 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages