Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003087953
Original file (2003087953.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
PART II - APPLICATION DATA

(Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1. Character of Discharge: General, Under Honorable Conditions

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 891001

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 8-27g, NGR 600-200

          b. Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation
4. Prior review(s): NONE


PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

 1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                            ARCAM
a. Period entered for: 6 Years ASR
b. Entry date: 771220
c. Age: 21 Years DOB: 560905
d. Educational level: HS Grad
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 90 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E5
11 Year(s) 9 Month(s) 12 Day(s)

4. Performance evaluations:
See OMPF

PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5. Periods of unauthorized absence: NONE

 Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL

         Mil conf

         Civil conf

         Other


6. Nonjudicial punishment: NONE
         Date     Offense(s)
        


7. Court-Martial data: NONE
         a. SCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

        
         b. SPCM:
                  Date Offense(s)

         c. GCM: 
                  Date Offense(s)


8.       Remarks: NONE
SECTION B - Prior Service Data


Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         ADT      780219   780613   NA
         (Concurrent Service)



PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l. Facts and Circumstances:

 a. Evidence of record shows that on 12 September 1989, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Military Division, The Adjutant General’s Office, Camp Curtis Guild, Reading Massachusetts, Orders 186-2 discharged the applicant from the Regular Army, effective date 1 October 1989, and assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement) ARPERCEN, St. Louis, Missouri. The record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Dept. of the Army and the Air Force, National Guard Bureau Report of Separation and Record of Service). His NGB Form 22 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8-27g, NGR 600-200 by reason of unsatisfactory participation, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records.
         b. On 1 October 1989, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 11 years, 9 months, and 12 days of active military service in the period under review.

2. Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action : National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 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 National Guard and as a reserve of the Army. Paragraph 8-27(g) of that regulation states that individuals can be separated for expiration of term of service enlistment, reenlistment, or period of statutorily obligated service, the soldier will be discharged by the separation authority (paragraph 1-25). The regulation also permitted the characterization of service as honorable, unless an uncharacterized description of service is required by paragraph 1-20a, is required or the soldier has been transferred to the IRR to fulfill a service obligation and given a service characterization of less than honorable upon transfer.


SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS


 1. Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.
2. Exhibit(s) submitted:

         A-1: DD Form 293, dated 030327, with one (1) enclosure(s).
         A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE
         B-l: Other Documents: NONE

PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)



SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion


Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor ( ) Legal Advisor



 a. Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):

b. Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):
PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits

1. Review/hearing information:

         a. Type requested:
         ( X ) Records review ( ) Hearing

         b. Type Held:
         ( X )Records review ( ) Hearing
         ( ) Tender Offer

         c. Review/hearing location and date: Washington, DC on 15 October 2003 .

         d. Appearance by:
         Applicant ( ) Yes ( X ) No
         Counsel ( ) Yes ( X ) No

          e. Applicant testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         f. Counsel presentation: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         g. Witness(es) testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
2. Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:

PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1. a. Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

          ( X )   Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive.
         ( )     Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as follows:
         ( X )   Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows:
Board Issue: (2) The characterization of service was too harsh.

         b. Request: ( X ) Recharacterization ( ) Change of Reason
2. Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on issues of propriety and/or equity:

          a. Propriety:    The applicant has not submitted an issue of propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of propriety to change the discharge.

          b. Equity:       The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above.

 (2) The issue is accepted. The Board carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. The Board found that the length and quality of the applicant’s service mitigated his misconduct. In view of the foregoing, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable. Accordingly, the Board recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.
(1) See Paragraph 3, below.

 3. Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s):

Inasmuch as the Board voted to grant the full relief requested, response to the remaining issue is neither required nor rendered.

PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.       Board conclusion(s):

         The discharge was:

          ( X )    Proper.
         ( )      Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to                                      .
         ( )      Improper as to reason. Change reason to                         under                       .

         ( )      Equitable.
         ( X )    Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to Honorable.
         ( )      Inequitable as to reason. Change reason to                       
                  under                                  .
         ( )      Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should be changed to                      under                          .
2. Voting record: Change No Change
         Reason 0 5
Characterization 5 0

         The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address below. The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right corner of this document.

Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
ATTN: Promulgation Team
1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor
Arlington, VA 22202-4508



3. Minority views: NONE

PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified       

                                 
Ms. McKim-Spilker
Case Reviewing Official 

PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

 Thru: Chief, National Guard Bureau Date: 17 October 2003
To: Adjutant General, State of Massachusetts

The Army Discharge Review Board, established under the provisions of Section 30, Public Law 346, 78th Congress, 22 June 1944 and codified as Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, in the case of the applicant named in Part I recommends that the applicant be considered for a change of his discharge by the Adjutant General, State of Massachusetts, with issuance of a new NGB Form 22, as follows:
( X )   Change characterization of discharge to Honorable.

SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


SPURGEON A. MOORE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




JOHN F. LONG
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge          C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

 AR Number: 2003087953 INDEX NUMBERS: A9406
Date of Review: 0031015 A9222
Character of Service: GD A0100
Date of Discharge: 891001
Authority: NGR 600-200 C8
Reason: A8400
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: HD 5-0 A






PART IX - VOTING RECORD

 Name  Reason Characterization
 CHANGE NC HON UHC NC UNCHAR

1.      Mbr      X  X           

2.      Mbr      X  X           

3. COL CHAMPIN, ALEJANDRO L.    Mbr      X  X           

4. COL HOUSE, ROBERT L.         Mbr      X  X           

5.      PO      X  X           






Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001059526

    Original file (2001059526.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    His NGB Form 22 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8-27g, NGR 600-200 by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. In view of the foregoing, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002066275

    Original file (2002066275.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the Board presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The evidence of record shows the applicant, in absentia, was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-27g, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003087591

    Original file (2003087591.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His NGB Form 22 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8-27g, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 1 May 1990, the applicant was discharged. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003093354

    Original file (AR2003093354.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data NONE Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. The Board determined that the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable and recommended not to change it. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR20040002963

    Original file (AR20040002963.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity: ( X ) Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003090510

    Original file (2003090510.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) showing that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8-27g, AR NGR 600-200 as an unsatisfactory participant, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99032309

    Original file (99032309.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    His NGB Form 22 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-26q, NGR 600-200 by reason of misconduct-unsatisfactory participant with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge. The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003085782

    Original file (2003085782.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Department of the Army and the Air Force National Guard Bureau Report of Separation and Record of Service). PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE Thru: Chief, National Guard Bureau Date: 10 October 2003 To: Adjutant General, State of MissouriThe Army Discharge Review Board,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003084567

    Original file (2003084567.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 15 May 1990, the applicant was discharged. In view of the foregoing, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000045741

    Original file (2000045741.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE C-1: DD Form 149, dated 000703. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted...