Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 081028	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documentation 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: 040527
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 040527   Chapter: 2     AR: 135-178
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: South Carolina Army National Guard, West Columbia, South Carolina 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 030423, While on active duty, at U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was disrespectful to a superior commissioned officer (030410), was derelict in the performance of his duties in that he negligently failed to secure a detainee cell (030410), unlawfully struck a detainee after the detainee was shackled (030410); Reduction to E3, extra duty for 45 days (FG).

030318, While on Active duty, at U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, grabbed the collar of a noncommissioned officer and shoved him against a wall (030313); Extra duty for 14 days, forfeiture of 7 days pay, suspended, for 90 days; command referral to combat stress (CG).

The record of evidence contains a memorandum, subject: Letter of Circumstances, dated 27 May 2004, from the South Carolina Army National Guard indicating the Applicant, during the above period of time, had received two field grade Article 15s and one company grade Article 15; however, aside from the Article 15s identified above, no further information is in the file. 

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  21
Current ENL Date: 011113    Current ENL Term: 04 Years  09 Months  (Army National Guard)
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 06 Mos, 15 Days ?????
Total Service:  		05 Yrs, 06 Mos, 15 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA   980317-010316/HD
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B  Cannon Crewmember   GT: 89   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Cuba   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AGCM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Windsor, SC
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the Applicant.


VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record  shows that the Applicant, a member of the South Carolina Army National Guard, was serving on temporary active duty, stationed at the Joint Task Force, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, with the 132nd MP Company, South Carolina Army National Guard.  While on temporary active duty, the Applicant was charged with Article 15 proceedings and afforded the opportunity to reform but failed to do so, continuing to display acts of aggression and disrespect.  As a result, on 26 July 2003, the Joint task Force, Guantanamo Bay Cuba, and the 132nd MP Company recommended termination of the Applicant's temporary active duty status.  On 30 July 2003, the Deputy Commanding General, Headquarters, Joint Task Force GTMO, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba,  approved the request and directed the Applicant be returned to the control of the South Carolina Army National Guard for displaying an inability to conform to military life.  On 15 May 2004, the Commander, 132nd MP Company notified the Applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions AR 135-178, Chapter 2.  The Applicant was provided an opportunity to consult with legal counsel and exercise his legal rights.  On 27 May 2004, the Commander, 132d MP Company, South Carolina Army National Guard, recommended the Applicant be discharged from the South Carolina Army National Guard based on substandard performance and inability to perform successfully in any given situation.  Pursuant to Orders 157-805, State of South Carolina Military Department, Office of the Adjutant General, Columbia, South Carolina, dated 5 June 2004, the Applicant was discharged from the Army National Guard and as a reserve of the Army, effective 27 May 2004, with an Under Other than Honorable Conditions discharge, RE Code 4.  

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures regarding enlisted personnel management of the Army National Guard.  Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 provides, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the State Army National Guard.  Chapter 2 of Army Regulation 135-178 provides for the separation of Soldiers when their conduct demonstrates there is no potential for rehabilitation and further useful military service.  The service of a member separated under this provision of Army Regulation 135-178 may be characterized as under other than honorable conditions as warranted by his or her military record.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of the Applicant’s available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the Applicant's discharge.  On 5 June 2004, the State of South Carolina Military Department, Office of the Adjutant General, Columbia, South Carolina, Orders 157-805, dated 5 June 2004, discharged the Applicant from the Army National Guard and as a reserve of the Army, effective 27 May 2004, with an Under Other than Honorable Conditions discharge, RE Code 4.  All the facts and circumstances pertaining to the Applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  Furthermore, 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.  Additionally, at the time of discharge the Applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the Applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  Therefore, 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: 17 August 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

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 2    No change 3
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: No Change										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: No Change
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080017154
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages