Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/02/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant 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?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 940916   Chapter: 8-27(g)      AR: NGR 600-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: D Co, 2-130 IN Bn, Urbana, IL  

Time Lost: NIF

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 881110    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	05 Yrs, 10Mos, 07Days ?????
Total Service:  		06 Yrs, 04Mos, 00Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	USAR-880517-880612/NA
                                       IADT-880613-880812/NA
                                       ARNG-880813-890522/NA
                                       IADT-8980523-890721/HD
                                       (Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11H10 Heavy AntiArmor Weapons Crewman   GT: 126   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM, NDSM, HSM, ASR, IL-MAR, IL-SAD 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant is employed by the U.S. Department of State as a Foreign Service Officer at the U.S. Embassy, Santo Domingo.

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 Army National Guard State of Illinois 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 8-27(g), 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 8 September 1994, Department of Military Affairs, State of Illinois , Camp Lincoln, Springfield, IL, Orders 174-102, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and assigned him to USAR Control Group (Annual Training), effective date:  16 September 1994, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

       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 8-27(g) 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 available military records for the period of enlistment under review,  the issues 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 State of Illinois and assignment to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training).  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.  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 8-27(g), NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions discharge.  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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issues and the supporting documents he submitted, however, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  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.  Further, the applicant's DD Form 4/2 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document), shows that he enlisted for a period of eight years on 17 May 1988, and the applicant indicated on page two of DA Form 3540/2 section III-Explanation to applicant/member in block six that he understood the enlistment option that he had selected provided that he would be a member of a troop program for a period of six years and a member of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) for the balance of his eight-year service obligation, which was authenticated by his initials.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 10 December 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 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. 


        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080003333
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages