Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 070713 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. 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: 050401 Chapter: 8-26d AR: NGR-600-200 Reason: Unsatisfactory Performance RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: E Co, 504th MSB, Pomona, CA 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 Year/Month: 7909 HOR City, State: Yucaipa, CA Current ENL Date: 040517 Current ENL Term: 2 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 10 Mos, 15 Days ????? Total Service: 08 Yrs, 11 Mos, 09 Days ????? Previous Discharges: USAR-970313-970812N/A AD-970812-980512/HD USARCG-851213-030803/NA USAR-030804-040516/NA Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the State of California Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army. However, the record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which was not authenticated by the applicant’s signature. It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Paragraph 8-26d, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general,under honorable conditions, with a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "3." The evidence of record shows that on 12 April 2005, Joint Forces Headquarters, California Army National Guard, Sacramento, CA, Orders 102-1044, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date: 1 April 2005, 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 covering enlisted personnel of the Army National Guard. Chapter 8-26d of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, discharge and separation of enlisted personnel Army Regulation 135-178 provides for the separation of members of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve when it is determined that a service member is unqualified for further military service by reason of unsatisfactory performance. The service of a member separated under this provision of Army Regulation 135-178 will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by his or her military record. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s available records during the period of enlistment under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the State of California Army National Guard and as 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 8-26d, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. In the absence of 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. Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue; however, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “3.” If the applicant desires to reenlist, he should contact the local recruiter to determine his eligibility to reenlist. Those individuals can best advise a former service member as to the needs of the Army at the time, and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 16 July 2008 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 to deny relief. 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: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 18 July 2008 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070009669 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages