Applicant Name: Application Receipt Date: 2008/11/17 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 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: NIF Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 060602 Chapter: 8-27d AR: NGR 600-200 Reason: Request for Discharge in Lieu of a Court-Martial RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: HSC(-) 505th Engineer BN, Gastonia, NC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 17 Current ENL Date: 011022 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 4 Yrs, 07Mos, 11Days ????? Total Service: 4 Yrs, 07Mos, 11Days ????? Previous Discharges: ARNG 011022-020729/NA RA 020730-021115/HD ARNG 021116-030930/NA RA 031001-050225/HD ARNG 050224-050805/NA RA 050806-060602/UOTH Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 21B/ Combat Engineer GT: 86 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: SWA Combat: Iraq (040228-050110) Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AFSMwM Dev, ASR, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, NDSM V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Ablemarle, NC Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the Applicant. 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 of North Carolina. The evidence indicates that on 27 June 2006, The State of North Carolina, Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, Joint Force Headquarters, Raleigh, NC, Orders 178-817, discharged the applicant from the Army National Guard and as a Reserve of the Army, effective date 2 June 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 honorable 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. 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 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 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 the Reserve of the Army. However, the applicant’s record contains a properly constituted NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) which identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The applicant’s NGB Form 22 shows the applicant, was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 8, Paragraph 8-27(d), NGR 600-200, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Therefore, the analyst recommends 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: 28 August 2009 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. 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. IX. Board Decision XI. Certification Signature Board Vote: Approval Authority: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) EDGAR J. YANGER Colonel, U.S. Army X. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20080019342 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages