Application Receipt Date: 060525 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 040930 Chapter: 8-27(f) AR: NGR 600-200 Reason: Acts Or Patterns Of Misconduct RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: HHC 2nd Bn 103rd Armor Div Scranton, PA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 710601 Current ENL Date: 990720 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ext 3 years 8 months (000301) Current ENL Service: 05 Yrs, 02 Mos, 11 Days ????? Total Service: 13 Yrs, 07Mos, 10 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USMCR-901106-910506/NA IADT-910507-911107/HD USMCR-911108-990719/NA Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11C10 Indirect Fire Infantryman GT: NIF EDU: 14 Years Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: TJSM (1), NDSM, V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The facts and circumstances leading to the applicant’s discharge 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 he was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-27f, 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 8 September 2004, Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania, Department Of Military And Veterans Affairs, The Adjutant General, Annville, PA, Orders 252-1024, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training) to complete his statutory obligation, effective: 30 September 2004. 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 for the period of enlistment under review, the issue and documents he submitted, the analyst recommends that relief be denied in this case. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the State of Pennsylvania Army National Guard and transfer to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training). However, the available records 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 discharge 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 8-27(f), NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct with a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service. The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. 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. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 070108 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change No change (Character) Change No change (Reason) (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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 not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 070112 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060007422 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages