Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 07/08/13	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and documents 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: 	   Date: 051122
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060210   Chapter: 8-27d       AR: NGR: 600-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial 	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: Co A (S&T), 132nd SPT BN, Janesville, WI 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051122, GCM, inappropriate conduct which resulted in this action, and will not be allowed to re-enlisted in any military service.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 940223    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	11 Yrs, 11Mos, 18Days ?????
Total Service:  		11 Yrs, 11Mos, 18Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	IADT-940403-940816/UNC
Highest Grade: E6		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92 F30 Petrl Supply Sp.   GT: 120   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ADSM, ARCAM, AAM x4, AFRM.

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Janesville, WI
Post Service Accomplishments: Not Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
The evidence shows the applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army National Guard of the State Wisconsin.  The evidence indicates that on 22 November 2005, Department Of The Army and Air Force, Wisconsin National Guard discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date 10 February 2006, with an under other than honorable  conditions discharge.  The record does contain 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 8-27d, NGR 600-200, with a characterization of service of under other than other conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "4."
       

       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.  

       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 found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the State of Wisconsin Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which indicates that 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 8-27d, NGR 600-200, record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge with a characterization of service of  under other than honorable conditions.  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.  The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 12 September 2008         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
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 found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from      the Army National Guard of the State Wisconsin.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which indicates that 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 8-27d, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  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.  The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  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.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.


        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 2    No change 3
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         Edgar J. Yanger			 
Issue a new DD Form 214  					         Colonel, U.S. Army
Change Characterization to: 			         President, Army Discharge Review Board 
Change Reason to:  
Other: NA										
RE Code: 									 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: ????? 
       	
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070011278
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages