Applicant Name: ?????

Application Receipt Date: 070827	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See 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: 020715   
Chapter: 8-27f    AR: NGR 600-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation
RE:     SPD: NA
Unit/Location: Det 1, HHC 2-112 IN (Mech), Tyrone, PA 16686 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020406, AWOL (020322-020324), reduced to E-3 (CG).

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Year/Month:  6708  
HOR City, State: Clearfield, PA
Current ENL Date: 990810    Current ENL Term: 1 Years  The applicant extended for 3 years on 000804.
Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 11 Mos, 05 Days ?????
Total Service:  11  Yrs, 01 Mos, 04 Days Item 10b on the applicant's NGB Form 22, prior reserve component service is incorrect, should read 01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 00 days. 
Previous Discharges: USAR-850325-850918/NA
                                      RA-850919-890426/HD
                                      RA-890427-920424/HD
                                      USARCG-920425-930324/NA
                                          (Break In Service)
Highest Grade: E-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11C10 Indirect Fire Infantryman   GT: 112   EDU: 14   Overseas: Germany   Combat: Panama (891220-900131) Prior Service
Decorations/Awards: AAM-3, AGCM-2, NDSM, AFEM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR, CIB 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
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 Pennsylvania Army National Guard and assignment to the USAR 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 that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-27f, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) Code of " 3."  On 18 June 2002, Common Wealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, The Adjutant General, Annville, PA, Orders 120-040, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), effective date: 15 July 2002, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 

      b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
      National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard.  Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, discharge and separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation.  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.  An enlisted member separated for misconduct which includes unsatisfactory participation will normally be furnished a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions, but characterization as general, under honorable conditions may be warranted under the guidelines in chapter 2, section III in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178.
      
       
      

      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 Pennsylvania Army National Guard and assignment to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement).  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 8-27f, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) Code of " 3." In the absence of 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, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue; however, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  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.  In view of the foregoing, 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: 15 August 2008              
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. 






















 

								        
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: 19 August 2008
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070012011
______________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 5 pages