Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 080609 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: 070313 Discharge Received: Date: 070503 Chapter: 8-27g AR: (NGR) 600-200 Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: C Co, 1-150th AR, Berkley, WV Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): The applicant was reduced from E-5 to E-4 under the provisions of Chapter 11, NGR 600-200. Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NA Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Year/Month: 7704 HOR City, State: Institute, WV Current ENL Date: 031001 Current ENL Term: 6 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 04Mos, 16Days ????? Total Service: 05 Yrs, 08Mos, 04Days ????? Previous Discharges: NA Highest Grade: E-5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 19K20 M1 Armor Crewman GT: NIF EDU: GED Cert Overseas: Iraq Combat: Iraq (040229-041227) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, GWOTSM, GWOTSM, AFSMM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Post Service Accomplishments: None listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 March 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant by certified mail of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 8-27g, NGR 600-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participation, for being charged with 16 periods of unexcused absences within a one year period (061210 thru 061210, 070120 thru 070112, 070116 thru 070218, 070308 thru 070311), with an general under honorable condictions discharge. The applicant was given 15 days from the date of the receipt of the notification letter to exercise his rights to counsel and to submit statements in his on behalf. On 13 April 2007, the certified notification letter was returned to the sender. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general under honorable conditions discharge. On 24 April 2007, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under 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 8-27(g) 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. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, to include his combat service, as well as his record of misconduct. The applicant served nearly six years in the Army National Guard, and attained the rank of Sergeant (E-5), and received a Army Commendation Medal for service in Iraq. Given the above factors, and his documented PTSD, it is recommended to the Board that the applicant's unsatisfactory performance was mitigated by service of sufficient length and merit to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. Accordingly, the analyst recommends that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to fully honorable. However, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge was fully supported by the record and therefore, remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 080723 Location: Washington DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: None Exhibits Submitted: None 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 2 No change 3 - 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: 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: 080725 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080009266 ______________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 5 pages