Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/10/22	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 submitted by the applicant in lieu of DD Form 293 and attached documents.

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: 051110   Chapter: 8-26e(2)a       NGR: 600-200
Reason: Acts or Patterns of Misconduct	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: 29th Div Band, Roanoke, VA 

Time Lost: None

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:  30
Current ENL Date: 981119    Current ENL Term: 01 Years  Records show that the applicant extended her enlistment  in the ARNG for 1 year (990807), 1 year and 4 months (001025), 1 year (020308), giving the applicant a new ETS of (030318).  The records was void of any other extension made by the applicant.  
Current ENL Service: 	06 Yrs, 11Mos, 22Days ?????
Total Service:  		18 Yrs, 03Mos, 22Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG-861006-980205/HD
Highest Grade: E7		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 02J3H/Clarinet Player   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR, NDSM-1, NCOPDR-2, ARCAM-3, AFRM-1

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Stevens Point, WI
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states that she now lives in Wisconsin and has a great position in her company at which she has work for 14 years.

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 Virginia 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 Paragraph 8-26e(2)a, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3."  The evidence of record shows that on 18 November 2005, Department of the Army and The Air Force, Office of the Adjutant General of Virginia, Joint Force Headquarters Virginia, Blackstone, VA, Orders 322-304, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date:  10 November 2005, 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 for the administrative separation of enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve.  Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army.  The regulation defines misconduct by reason of one or more of the following:  minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, abuse of illegal drugs, and conviction by civil authorities.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of all the applicant’s available military records during the period of enlistment under review, the documents and the issues she 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 her discharge from the Army National Guard State of Arizonai 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 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 8-26e(2)a, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct, with a characterization of service of general, under 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.  By her misconduct the applicant diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service, to include the reentry eligibility (RE) code was both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.
       
       Further, the applicant's issue regarding having the 2 1/2 years she lost due to an unjust discharge added to her record, does not fall within the purview of this Board.  The applicant may apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), utilizing DD Form 149 regarding this matter.  An application for that Board is enclosed.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 4 May 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted 3 pages of additional documents in support of her personal appearance hearing.

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing her testimony, 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 1    No change 4
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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080016175
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages