Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/02/23	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: 960201   Chapter: 8-27g      AR: 600-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: B Co, 1-128th Inf, WIARNG, New Richmond, WI 

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:  22
Current ENL Date: 911212    Current ENL Term: 2 Years  0 Mos.10 Days
Current ENL Service: 	04 Yrs, 01Mos, 20Days ?????
Total Service:  		07 Yrs, 08Mos, 19Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 860813-880512/HD
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 11B/Infantryman   GT: 111   EDU: HS GRAD   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM (2), NDSM, ASR, AGCM, NCOPDR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: MN ARNG 030225-050224/HD














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 State of Wisconsin Army National Guard 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 8-27g, NGR 600-200, by unsatisfactory participation, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions and a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of "3."  On 1 February 1996, Department of Military Affairs, Office of the Adjutant General, Madison, WI, Orders 022-536, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective date:  1 February 1996, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was assigned to the Army Reserve Personnel Center (Annual Training), 9700 Page Boulevard, St Louis, MO, for completion of statutory or contractual military service obligation.

       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 8-27g 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 issue 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 State of Wisconsin Army National Guard.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which indicates that 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 8-27g, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  Barring evidence to the contrary, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and 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 issue and desire to enlist in the WI Air National Guard; however, 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 acknowledges the applicant's issue and successful transition to civilian life, as well as, his service in the Minnesota ARNG outlined with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.   In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the characterization of service and reason for discharge 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: 2 December 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 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: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090003061
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages