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):  010306

3.  Authority for separation:

      a.  Regulation:  Chapter 8, Paragraph 26k, NGR 600-200

      b.  Reason:  Unsatisfactory Participant

4.  Prior review(s):  NONE



                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

                 SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

1.    Service data:                              2.  Awards and
    decorations:
                                           ASR
    a.  Period entered for:  8 Years
    b.  Entry date:  980818
    c.  Age:  18 Years   DOB:  790827
    d.  Educational level:  HS Grad
    e.  Aptitude area score:
          GT:  104                               3.  Highest grade
achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E4
          2 Years  6 Months  19 Days

                                               4.  Performance evaluations:

                                                   NONE

                         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
                                    NONE

Other discharge(s):

      Service    From  To    Type Discharge
      ARNGUS     980818      980917     NA
      IADT  980918     990211     Uncharacterized
         (Continuous Service)




                         PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

      a.  All the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s
discharge proceedings are not contained in the available records.  The
evidence of record shows that the applicant absented himself from scheduled
Annual Training (AT) during the period 5-6 August 2000, 8-10 September
2000, and 13-15 October 2000.  Separate certified mail notification was
sent to the applicant of his unexcused absences.  The applicant had not
made any attempt to contact his unit or reply to the notifications.  On 3
November 2000, the unit commander initiated separation action and sent it
via certified mail to the applicant with suspense of 45 days for a written
response.  On 23 January 2001, as a result of having received no response
from the applicant, the unit commander initiated separation action under
the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-26k, NGR 600-200, by reason of
unsatisfactory participation, with an other than honorable conditions
discharge.  The available record does not contain the separation
authority’s final decision.  On 22 March 2001, the State of Michigan,
Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, Lansing, Michigan, Orders 081-
019, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective 6
March 2001, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, and
assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Reinf), St Louis, Missouri for the
remainder of his statutory obligation.  The record contains a properly
constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service).  It
indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of
Paragraph 8-26k, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with
a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

      b.  On 6 March 2001, the applicant was discharged.  At the time of
discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years, 6 months, and 19 days of
military service in the period under review.

2.  Legal/Regulatory Basis for Separation Action:  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 8-26(k) 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.


                      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 030923, with three (3) enclosures.
      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 14 July 2004.

      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 is 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 does not condone the applicant’s
unsatisfactory participation; however, determined that the characterization
of service is now inequitable.  The Board found that the applicant’s
unsatisfactory participation was mitigated by the overall length and
quality of his service, his transfer to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR),
the fact that he was not reduced in grade, and his current service with the
State of Michigan Army National Guard.  In view of the foregoing, the Board
voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of characterization of
service to honorable.  Accordingly, the Board recommends that the Adjutant
General, State of Michigan upgrade the applicant’s characterization of
service to 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       3         2

        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
                  1901 South Bell Street, 2nd Floor
                  Arlington, VA  22202-4508



3.  Minority views:  NONE
                           PART VII - BOARD ACTION
                 SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified

                          
MR. RIVERA
Case Reviewing Official

                     PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
                            SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

Thru: Chief, National Guard Bureau            Date:  16 July 2004
To:   Adjutant General, State of Michigan

     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 Michigan, with issuance of
a new NGB Form 22, as follows:

           ( X ) Change characterization of discharge to
                  Honorable.

                          SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


ROBERT L. HOUSE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
   Review Board

Official:




MARY E. SHAW
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:  2003096759                    INDEX NUMBERS:  A9218
Date of Review:  040714                                   A9236
Character of Service:  GD                                 A9222
Date of Discharge:  010306
Authority:  NGR 600-200 C8
Reason:  A8400
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation:  HD 3-2 A








                           PART IX - VOTING RECORD

    Name                                   Reason          Characterization
                                           CHANGE   NC     HON  UHC   NC
UNCHAR

    1.      Mbr          X                 X       

    2.      Mbr          X       X                 

    3.      Mbr          X                 X       

    4.      Mbr          X       X                 

    5.      PO           X       X