Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/07/20	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 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: 090112   Chapter: 8-27f       NGR: 600-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: A Co, 181st BSB (Rear) Seattle, WA 

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:  21
Current ENL Date: 030411    Current ENL Term: 08 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	05 Yrs, 09Mos, 02Days ?????
Total Service:  		05 Yrs, 09Mos, 02Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ARNG-030411-040126/NA
                                       ADT-040127-040701/UNC
                                       ARNG-040702-040815/NA
                                       OAD-040816-050404/HD
                                       (Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92A10/Automated Logistic Specialist   GT: NIF   EDU: GED   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (041024-050310)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, AFRM(w/M Device), ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
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 State of Washington, Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army are not contained in the available records.  However, the record shows that on 16 January 2009, Headquarters Military Department, State of Washington, Office of the Adjutant General, Camp Murray, Tacoma, WA, Orders 016-011, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date: 12 January 2009, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

       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 8-27(f) 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 during the period of enlistment under review and the issues 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 Washington, Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army.  However, on 16 January 2009, Headquarters Military Department, State of Washington, Office of the Adjutant General, Camp Murray, Tacoma, WA, Orders 016-011, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date: 12 January 2009, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  This document identifies the characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  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 issue that he was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, however, the available record does not support the issue that the applicant suffers from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and no evidence to support it has been submitted by the applicant, that the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  Additionally, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain the specific documents that would indicate the reason for his separation from the United States Army Reserve.  If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action for the Board’s consideration.  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: 30 October 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 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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090012915
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages