Application Receipt Date: 060621 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: 940601 Chapter: 8-26q AR: NGR 600-200 Reason: Acts Or Patterns Of Misconduct RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: Company A (-) 878th Engineer Battalion Swainsboro, GA 30401 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: 700804 Current ENL Date: 900118 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 04 Yrs, 04 Mos, 14 Days ????? Total Service: 04 Yrs, 08 Mos, 17 Days item 10c on NGB Form 22 is incorrect, should read 00 yrs, 04 mos, 03 days, see DD Form 214. Previous Discharges: ARNG-900118-940601/GD ADT-900213-900615/UNC (Concurrent Service) Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 51B10 Carpentry/Masonry Spec GT: 85 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: South West Asia Combat: SWA dates not in file. Decorations/Awards: ARCAM, ASR, NDSM, SWASM w/1 BSS, C/Ach, C/App V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states he is self employed and claims that he woking on his barber's license. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge from the State of Georgia Army National Guard 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 that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26q, 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 6 May 1994, the State Of Georgia, Department Of Defense, Military Division, Office Of The Adjutant General, Atlanta, GA, Orders 70-24, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date: 1 June 1994, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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 Georgia Army National Guard and a Reserve of the Army. 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. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the service 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 8-26q, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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 remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 23 May 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 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, 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: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 31 May 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060008935 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages