Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 07/08/13 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 and documents submitted by the applicant. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: NA See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 051122 Discharge Received: Date: 060210 Chapter: 8-27d AR: NGR: 600-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: Co A (S&T), 132nd SPT BN, Janesville, WI Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 051122, GCM, inappropriate conduct which resulted in this action, and will not be allowed to re-enlisted in any military service. Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 19 Current ENL Date: 940223 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 11 Yrs, 11Mos, 18Days ????? Total Service: 11 Yrs, 11Mos, 18Days ????? Previous Discharges: IADT-940403-940816/UNC Highest Grade: E6 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92 F30 Petrl Supply Sp. GT: 120 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ADSM, ARCAM, AAM x4, AFRM. V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Janesville, WI Post Service Accomplishments: Not 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 the State Wisconsin. The evidence indicates that on 22 November 2005, Department Of The Army and Air Force, Wisconsin National Guard discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date 10 February 2006, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 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 8-27d, NGR 600-200, with a characterization of service of under other than other conditions, and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of "4." 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. 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 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 Wisconsin 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 indicates that 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 8-27d, NGR 600-200, record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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. The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. 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: 12 September 2008 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation 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 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 Army National Guard of the State Wisconsin. However, the record does contain a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service), which indicates that 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 8-27d, NGR 600-200, by reason of acts or patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. 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. The analyst noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the evidence was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. Furthermore, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.” 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. 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. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 2 No change 3 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) Edgar J. Yanger Issue a new DD Form 214 Colonel, U.S. Army Change Characterization to: President, Army Discharge Review Board Change Reason to: Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: ????? ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070011278 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages