Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 071010 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 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: 060824 Chapter: 8-27f AR: 600-200 Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: PEW Unit/Location: 449 CSBN Det1 Co B REAR, AR (PF2B4-981) Camp Robinson, North Little Rock, AR 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 Year/Month: 8707 HOR City, State: Hot Springs, AR Current ENL Date: 051018 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 00 Yrs, 10Mos, 7Days ????? Total Service: 00 Yrs, 10Mos, 7Days ????? Previous Discharges: NA Highest Grade: E-1 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: None GT: NIF EDU: GED Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: None V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: None 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 and as a reserve of the Army. The record indicates that on 28 August 2006, Military Department of Arkansas, Office of the Adjutant General, Camp Joseph T. Robinson, North Little Rock AR, Orders 240-863, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective 24 August 2006, with an uncharacterized discharge. The record contains 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 8-27f, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation with a characterization of service of uncharacterized, and a reenlistment eligibility, (RE) code of "3." 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 7 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, discharge and separation of enlisted personnel for misconduct due to unsatisfactory participation. 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. An enlisted member separated for misconduct which includes unsatisfactory participation will normally be furnished a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178. 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 issue he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records and the analyst presumed government regularty in the discharge process. On 28 August 2006, Military Department of Arkansas, Office of the Adjutant General, Camp Joseph T. Robinson, North Little Rock AR, Orders 240-863, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard, effective 24 August 2006, with an uncharacterized discharge. The record contains 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 8-26f, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation, with an uncharacterized discharge, and a Reenlistment Eligibility Code of RE 3. 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: 080819 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: Proper Improper 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: 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: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 080819 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070013924 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages