Application Receipt Date: 061214 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: 950425 Chapter: 8-26q AR: NGR 600-200 Reason: Misconduct-Unsatisfactory Participant RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: E Company 103rd Engineer Battalion, Philadelphia, PA 19104-2839 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: 691005 Current ENL Date: 931103 Current ENL Term: 5 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05 Mos, 23 Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 05 Mos, 22 Days ????? Previous Discharges: ARNG-900817-901118/NA ADT-901119-910325/UNC ARNG-910326-930816/HD USARCG-930817-931102/NA Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92A10 Automated Logistics Spec/77F10 Petroleum Supply Spec GT: 101 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, 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 Pennsylvania 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 8-26q, NGR 600-200, by reason of misconduct-unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service under other than honorable conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "4." On 21 April 1995, the Common Wealth Of Pennsylvania, Department Of Military Affairs, The Adjutant General, Annville, PA, Orders 077-034, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date: 25 April 1995, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The analyst noted that on the applicant's NGB Form 22, item 23, Authority and Reason is annotated as "NGR 600-200, Paragraph 8-26q", should read as "NGR 600-200, Paragraph 8-27f, misconduct-unsatisfactory participation." b. Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-91 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard. Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army Reserve National Guard. Paragraph 8-26k 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. 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 Pennsylvania Army National Guard and a Reserve of the Army. 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 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 8-27f, NGR 600-200, by reason of misconduct-unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "4." The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. 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, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.” An RE code of “4” can not be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. Therefore, the analyst determined that 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: 6 August 2008 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: No Witnesses/Observers: No Exhibits Submitted: No 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, hearing his testimony, 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: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 17 August 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060017231 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 4 pages