Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/03/10	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed 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: 020708   Chapter: 8-26g(2)     AR: NGR 600-200
Reason: Erroneous Enlistment or Extension	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: HHT, 1-18 CAV, Ontario, CA 

Time Lost: None

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:  35
Current ENL Date: 020619    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	00 Yrs, 00Mos, 20Days ?????
Total Service:  		15 Yrs, 03Mos, 06Days In block 12e on the NGB Form 22, prior reserve component service shows a period of 02 Yrs, 07 Mos, 26 days.  However, ten months of that period cannot be substantiated by the available record.   
Previous Discharges: 	USAF-850903-890306/HD
                                       USAFR-890307-901226/NA
                                       AFANGUS-901227-000113/HD
                                           (Break in Service)
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 71L20 Admin Spec   GT: 101   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards:  AFMSM, AFGCM, NDSM, AFTR, NCOPMER, AFLSA 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Riverside, CA
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 Army National Guard  State of California and as a Reserve of the Army 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 Chapter 8, paragraph 8-26g(2), NGR 600-200, by reason of erroneous enlistment or extension with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) Code of " 3."  On 9 July 2002, State of California, Office of the Adjutant General,Sacramento, CA, Orders 190-1132, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date:  8 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, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army Reserve National Guard.  Paragraph 8-26g(2) of that regulation provides in pertinent part that individuals can be separated for erroneous enlistment or extension.  Army policy states that an honorable discharge is normally considered appropriate.  Army Regulation 135-178 provides in pertinent part, that a soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty and  the regulation requires an uncharacterized separation of service under this chapter.  

       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 complete facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army National Guard  State of California and as a Reserve of the Army.  However, the available records 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 discharge 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 8-26g(2), NGR 600-200, by reason of erroneous enlistment or extension with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service.  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 outlined in his DD Form 293, however, the analyst did not find said issues sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  Further, even though a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army.  The applicable Army regulation states that there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization.  The analyst having examined all the circumstances determined that the applicant's single incident of misconduct did indeed adversely affect the quality of service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.  This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Additionally, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.”  If reenlistment is desired, the applicant should contact the local recruiter to determine 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.  
       
       The analyst noted that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, paragraph 8-26g(2), NGR 600-200, by reason of erroneous enlistment or extension, which requires an uncharacterized separation of service while in an entry level status.  Army Regulation 135-178 provides in pertinent part, that a soldier is in entry-level status for the first 180 days of continuous active duty and  the regulation requires an uncharacterized separation of service under this chapter.  The purpose of the entry-level status is to provide the soldier a probationary period.  A fully honorable discharge is not authorized under ELS conditions.  The analyst further noted that the applicant requested on his DD Form 293, that the date of discharge ending as of 8 July 2002, be reviewed by the Army Discharge Review Board.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard  State of California on 19 June 2002, which gave him a net service this priod  of 20 days.  The evidence of record shows that someone in the separation process erroneously entered on the NGB Form 22, block 24, characterization of service, "general, under honorable conditions."  The regulation requires an uncharacterized separation of service while in an entry level status.  It is the Board's policy not to change the characterization of service to a lesser degree than received even though substantiated in the applicant's record.  The Board will not downgrade a characterization of service.  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: 14 January 2009         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 AR20080003775
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages