Application Receipt Date: 2006/10/23 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant submitted no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 940405 Chapter: 8-27, NGR 600-200 AR: Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: C Company, 1-106th Aviation Battalion, Tacoma, WA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier's Overall Record DOB: 720815 Current ENL Date: 910828 Current ENL Term: 8 Years Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 07Mos, 08Days Total Service: 02 Yrs, 07Mos, 08Days Previous Discharges: ADT 920129-920710/UNC (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 63B10/Light Vehicle Mechanic GT: 114 EDU: GED Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR, 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 evidence shows the applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the Army National Guard of Washington. The evidence indicates that on 5 April 1994, HQ, Military Department, State of Washington, Office of the Adjutant General, Camp Murray, Tacoma Washington, Orders 95-23 discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective date 5 April 1994, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge and assigned him to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement), St. Louis, Missouri to complete his statutory obligation. The record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service). It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-27g, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation, with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3." b. Legal Basis for Separation: National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-200 and Army Regulation 135-178 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard. Chapter 7 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, discharge and separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation. 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. An enlisted member separated for misconduct which includes unsatisfactory participation will normally be furnished a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178. 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, and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant's discharge are not contained in the available records. On 5 April 1994, HQ, Military Department, State of Washington, Office of the Adjutant General, Camp Murray, Tacoma Washington, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective 5 April 1994, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. The record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service). It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-27g, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions, and a Reenlistment Eligibility Code of RE 3. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. 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: 19 December 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. 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 0 No change 5 - Character Change 0 No change 5 - 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 to deny relief. Case report reviewed and verified by: Alejandro Champin, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 21 December 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060015140 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages