https://twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/1524497660719161345
This is not a DD214. https://t.co/V6l802WQ6F— Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellUSA) May 11, 2022
Unfortunately no. I have more questions than answers now.— Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellUSA) May 11, 2022
None of this is a DD214, which is the definitive document that establishes Military Service: what she did, where she went, and the True nature of her discharge. This further Confuses an incredibly Murky and Weird Résumé https://t.co/3OLEoAVz7o— Greg Kelly (@gregkellyusa) May 11, 2022
She was in the Reserves. Do they use a DD214 like full timer Army? Never been in the military myself. I have my dad's discharge papers but that was the end of WWII.
Both you and Greg Kelly are idiots
The NGB Form 22 is a DD214 equivalent for Guardsmen. The letter is something that an IRR person who’d never been activated would get.
The picture this paints to me is that she was a Guardsmen for 7 years in a unit that never, ever got activated (not that uncommon in the 90s), moved from Alabama to Missouri and maintained her status in the IRR (so she wouldn’t lose seniority), looked for a billet in a local guard or reserve unit but couldn’t find one, and then when she moved again said to heck with it and processed out of the IRR.
Honorable, not that uncommon, but hardly notable. I think it’s actually more interesting that she would be in the Guard for 7 years and never even get a Secret clearance. That tells me that her unit was never, ever going to get activated or even seriously train with active duty parent units. Again, back in the 90s that was not horribly uncommon for ARNG units.
Bottom line is that if I was her advisor, I’d proudly claim the 7 years in the Guard (nothing to be ashamed of there) and 3 years in the IRR. But I wouldn’t push a 10 year Army record. While TECHNICALLY correct, it’s a little misleading IMHO.
Correspondence of 27 June 2000 indicates effective date of discharge 27 June 2000.
The discharge authorization is under AR 135-178, per correspondence of 27 June 2000. This reflects an administrative separation.
Department of Defense INSTRUCTION NUMBER 1332.14
January 27, 2014
Incorporating Change 6, Effective September 1, 2021
SUBJECT: Enlisted Administrative Separations
a. The readiness of the Military Services be preserved by maintaining high standards of performance, conduct, and discipline. Separation promotes the readiness of the Military Services by providing an orderly means to:(1) Evaluate the suitability of persons to serve in the enlisted ranks of the Military Services based on their ability to meet required performance, conduct, and disciplinary standards.
(2) Maintain standards of performance, conduct, and discipline through characterization of service in a system that emphasizes the importance of honorable service.
(3) Achieve authorized force levels and grade distributions.
(4) Provide an orderly means of discharge for enlisted personnel.
Reenlistment Code RE-1 signified eligibility to reenlist without issue.