Application Receipt Date:060920 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's DD Form 293. 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: 010426 Chapter: 8-26e (2) AR: NGR 600-200 Reason: Acts Or Patterns Of Misconduct RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: HHC, 1st Battalion, 124th Infantry, Miami, FL 33127-4096 Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 770623 Current ENL Date: 980908/OADT Current ENL Term: 00 Years 13 Weeks Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 09 Mos, 16 Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 00 Mos, 26 Days ????? Previous Discharges: ARNG-980710-980908/NA ADT-980908-981217/UNC ARNG-981007-010426/GD (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11B10 Infantryman GT: 122 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 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 Florida 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. It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26e (2), NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of "3." On 26 April 2001, Departments of the Army and the Air Force, Florida National Guard, Office of the Adjutant General, St. Francis Barracks, St. Augustine, Florida, Orders P116-018, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date: 26 April 2006, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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 and the issues 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 Florida Army National Guard and 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 8-26e (2), NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Barring evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. Therefore, 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: 21 November 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 0 No change 5 - 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, and 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: 28 November 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060013369 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 5 pages