Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/02/03	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See 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: 	UOTH Date: 050214
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050509   Chapter: 8-27f      AR: NGR-600-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participant	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: HHC (-Det 1), 81st AR Bde (Rear), Seattle, WA 

Time Lost: NIF

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:  36
Current ENL Date: 010321    Current ENL Term: 6 Years  with an approved waiver
Current ENL Service: 	04 Yrs, 01Mos, 19Days ?
Total Service:  		17 Yrs, 11Mos, 27Days block 10d on the NGB Form 22 total service for pay is incorrect, it should read 17 Yrs, 11 Mos, 27 Days.
Previous Discharges: 	RA-870305-890411/HD
                                       USARCG-890412-930130/NA
                                       RA-930131-950306/HD
                                       RA-950307-961205/HD
                                       RA-961206-981106/HD
                                       USAR-000216-001111/NA
                                       USARCG-001112-010320/NA
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 13B10 Cannon Crewmember   GT: 101   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Hawaii   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: AAM-5, AGCM, ARCAM, NDSM, ASR, OSR-2, NGSR, EIB, 

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Eatonville, WA
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 14 February 2005, the unit commander (LTC AV, WAARNG) notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, paragraph 13-1a AR 135-138, by reason of unsatisfactory participation, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was advised of his rights.  The applicant's election of rights are contained in the available record, however; they are not signed  and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The Deputy Chief of Staff Personnel (DCSPER)  recommended that the applicant be discharged for unsatisfactory participation and he was notified that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  Further, the applicant did not respond within 45 days to the commander's letter of involuntarily separation actions and this waives any and  all rights previously afforded him; and the discharge order will be coded RE-4 to preclude him from returning to service.  On 25 April 2005, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions and the discharge order will be coded RE-4.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank. 

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 135-78 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve.  Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the USAR.  Paragraph 13-1 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 military records during 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.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of unsatisfactory participation.  The analyst determined that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By his unsatisfactory participation, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a fully honorable characterization of service.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issues regarding his family medical issues and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.  Further, the creation of discharge certificates is not within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  A copy of the appropriate discharge certificate may be acquired by submission of a Standard Form 180 (obtained from a local military installation) to the applicable address:  Former National Guard personnel: contact the State National Guard Office for assistance.  Finally, 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.  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: 20 November 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 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: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090005779
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages