Application Receipt Date: 060504 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293. 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: 950425 Chapter: 8-26q NGR: 600-200 Reason: Misconduct-Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: B Battery, 1st Battalion, 107th Field Artillery, Pittsburgh, PA 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: 630506 Current ENL Date: 921009 Current ENL Term: 03 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 06Mos, 17Days ????? Total Service: 11 Yrs, 06Mos, 05Days ????? Previous Discharges: ARNG-820405-820731/NA ADT-820801-821028/HD ARNG-821029-870515/GD USARCG-870516-880404/NA USAR-891020-900730/NA IRR-900801-911104/NA USARCG-911105-921008/NA Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 13B10 (Cannon Crewmember) GT: 77 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR, NDSM, ARCAM 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 specific facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge from the Pennsylvania Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army are not contained in the available records. Evidence of record shows that on 18 April 1995, The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Military Affairs, The Adjutant General, Annville, Pennsylvania 17003-5002, Orders 074-034, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective 25 April 1995, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service). His NGB Form 22 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8-26q, NGR 600-200 by reason of unsatisfactory participation, 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 8-26q 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. Characterization of service is normally under other than honorable conditions. 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, the issue, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends that relief be denied in this case. The record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to a discharge from the State of Pennsylvania Army National Guard and the Reserve of the Army. However, the available records contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst is presumming Government Regularity in the discharge process. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-26q, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. The applicant has provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. In the absence information 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 remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 20 June 2007 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 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 not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, 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: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 28 June 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060006698 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 5 pages