Application Receipt Date: 060821 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents. 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: 930804 Chapter: 8-26q AR: NGR 600-200 Reason: Acts or Patterns of Misconduct RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: Detachment 1, HHC 1st Battalion, 246th Armor, Three Rivers, MI 49093-0248 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 DOB: 700113 Current ENL Date: 920302 Current ENL Term: 3 Years 5 Months Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05 Mos, 03 Days ????? Total Service: 05 Yrs, 00 Mos, 15 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA-880720-920301/HD Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 19D10 Cavalry Scout GT: 101 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Germany/SouthWest Asia Combat: Saudi Arabia (901220-910429) Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, SWASM w/2 BSS, ASR, OSR, ALB V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant claims he has been employed by the Florida Department of Corrections for nine years and has never received any disciplinary action. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge from the State of Michigan Army National Guard are not contained in the available records. However, the record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which the applicant was unavailable for signature. This document indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26q, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, with a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3." The evidence of record further shows that on 3 August 1993, State of Michigan, Department Of Military Affairs, Lansing, MI, 0rders 151-028, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date: 4 August 1993, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. b. Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve. Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army. The regulation defines misconduct by reason of one or more of the following: minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, abuse of illegal drugs, and conviction by civil authorities. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records for the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst recommends that relief be denied in this case. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the State of Michigan Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army. However, the available records does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which the applicant was unavailable for signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the service and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-26q, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the applicant has provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. 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. Additionally, 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. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 29 August 2007 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: 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 and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None 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: 20 September 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060012026 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 6 pages