Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 2008/08/29	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 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: 	NIF   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070319   Chapter: 8-35j    AR: NGR 600-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: 34th MP Co, 34th ID, Rosemount, MN 

Time Lost: NIF

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:  20
Current ENL Date: 030307    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  0
Current ENL Service: 	4 Yrs, 0Mos, 13Days ?????
Total Service:  	4 Yrs, 0Mos, 13Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ADT 030402-030808/HD
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 31B Military Police   GT: 113   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: Afghanistan (030923-040516)
Decorations/Awards: AFRM W/M, ARCOM, NDSM, ASR, GWOTEM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The specific facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge from the State of Minnesota 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 8-35j, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3." 

       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 8-27(g) 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, but 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 military records, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general under honorable conditions.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service.   The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant's characterization of service was too harsh and as a result it is inequitable.  The analyst noted that the overall length and quality, of the applicant's service to include his combat service and independent medical documents he submitted warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general under honorable conditions.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 17 October 2008         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 characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable.  The Board determined that the applicant’s overall length and quality to include his combat service and medical diagnosis mitigated the discrediting entries of his service record.   Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions.  However, the Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 5    No change 0
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
								         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: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080013570
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages