Application Receipt Date: 060419	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293, with attachment.  The applicant submitted a letter from a clinical psychologist.

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: 960311   
Chapter: 8-26g    AR: NGR 600-200
Reason: Acts or Patterns of Misconduct
RE:     SPD: None
Unit/Location: 32d  Military Police Company, 4108 N. Richards Street, Milwaukee, WI 53212  

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  760628  
Current ENL Date: 940706    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 1 Yrs, 8 Mos, 6 Days ?????
Total Service:  1 Yrs, 8 Mos, 6 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: ADT-950621-951020/HD 
                                      (Concurrent Service)
Highest Grade: E-2
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 95B10, Military Police   GT: 105   EDU: GED   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR, NDSM
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None were submitted.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The complete 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.  That NGB Form 22 indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-26g, 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.  On 11 March 1996, the State Of Wisconsin, Department of Military Affairs, Office of the Adjutant General, Madison, Wisconsin 53708-8111, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective date: 11 March 1996, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 

      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 8-26q (3) of that regulation provides in pertinent part that individuals can be separated for misconduct-abuse of illegal drugs.
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

      c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
      After a careful review of all the applicant’s available records for the period of enlistment under review and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant's characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable.  The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s discharge is now inequitable.  While the applicant's misconduct is not condoned, the analyst found that the time that has elasped since his discharge mitigated the discrediting entry in his service record.  However, the reason was both proper and equitable and the analyst recommends to the Board not to change it.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 14 February 2007              
Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A




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. John Zangas, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: None
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: 16 February 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060005588

Applicant Name:  Mr.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 5 pages