Application Receipt Date: 061122	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant.

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: 020201   
Chapter: 8-27f    AR: NGR 600-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participant
RE:     SPD: NA
Unit/Location: HHC, 579 Engr Bn, Santa Rosa, CA  

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:  710103  
Current ENL Date: 010927    Current ENL Term: 1 Years  The applicant extended for 2 Months (011029).
Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 04 Mos, 05 Days      
Total Service:  09  Yrs, 08Mos, 19 Days Item 10d on the applicant's NG Form 22 total service for pay is incorrect, should read 09 Yrs, 8 Mos, 19 Days
Previous Discharges: USAR-880329-880622/NA
                                      IADT-880623-880901/NA
                                      USAR-880902-890523/NA
                                      RA-890524-920731/HD
                                      USARCG-920801-970425/NA
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 16R10 Vulcan Crewmember   GT: 113   EDU: 14 Years   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, NDSM, ASR, OSR, ALB
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant stated he is employed by the State of Washington Department of Revenue as a Revenue Agent and he also received a tenative job offer from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.  

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The complete facts and circumstances leading to the applicant's release from the State ofCalifornia Army National Guard and transfer to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement) 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 he was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-27f, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3."  The evidence of record shows that on 21 August 2002, State of California, Office of the Adjutant General, Sacramento, CA, Orders 233-1222, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) to complete his statutory obligation, effective date:  1 February 2002, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.     

      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(f) 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 release from the State of California Army National Guard and transfer to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  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 discharge 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 8-27(f), NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service.  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, the US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable.  The Defense Discharge Review Standards specifically state that no factors should be established that requires automatic change or denial of a change in discharge.  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.  Finally, the analyst congratulates the applicant on his work achievements since departing the Army.  However, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  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 December 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:      
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060016231

Applicant Name:  Mr.         
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 6 pages