Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 080102	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 and supporting 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: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 040615   Chapter: 8-26k       AR: NGR 600-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: 200th MP Co Salisbury, MD 

Time Lost: 16 Days listed on DD214 from USMC dated 970714

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  26
Current ENL Date: 011116    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 7Mos, 0Days ?????
Total Service:  		10 Yrs, 7Mos, 16Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USMC 9307-9707/HD
                                       
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68A10 Biomedical Equipment Spc   GT: 117   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, SSDR, GCM, 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Atlanta, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: Currently serving in the GA ARNG as an E4, received an HD from the GA ARNG for service 050512-071212

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.  The record indicates that on 15 June 2004 Department of the Army and Air Force National Guard Bureau, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective 15 June 2004, with a General under honorable conditions discharge and assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), St Louis, Missouri to complete 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 participation, with a characterization of service of General under honorable conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3." 

       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 8-26(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.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.  

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct.  The applicant served four years in the USMC before joining the Army National Guard, he attained the rank of Private First Class (E-3) and received the Good Conduct Medal. After his General discharge for unsatisfactory participation he obtained a waiver to join the Georgia National Guard where he was promoted to Specialist (E4) and is currently serving.  Given the above factors, it is recommended to the Board that the applicant's unsatisfactory performance was mitigated by service of sufficient length and merit to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.   Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable.
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 081031         Location: Washington DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




















VIII.  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 characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant’s length and quality of his service to include his combat service and his post service in the Georgia Army National Guard  and as a result it is inequitable.  Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to fully honorable.  The Board determined that the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 5    No change 0
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
								         President, Army Discharge Review Board
X.  Board Action Recommended/Directed

No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to: Honorable
Change Reason to: None
Other: Thru:  Chief, National Guard Bureau            Date: 31 October 2008
To:  Adjutant General, State of Maryland

            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 Maryland, with issuance of a new NGB Form 22a, as follows:
                  
           ( X )   Change characterization of discharge to Honorable
           (   )    This action does not entail grade restoration
           ( X )   Other (see remarks below). 
Remarks:  This action entails a change to the applicant’s discharge from the Reserve of the Army to reflect a characterization of service to honorable.  ARBA Support Division-St. Louis is directed to ensure that the applicant’s discharge from the Reserve of the Army reflects the aforementioned change.
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade:  NA

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080000169
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages