Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/23 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 149 submitted by the applicant. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: N/A See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 000620 Discharge Received: Date: 010107 Chapter: 13 AR: 135-178 Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: NIF Unit/Location: 326th Finance Group, 63 RSC, Bell CA 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: 19 Current ENL Date: 970204 Current ENL Term: 8 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 11Mos, 3Days ????? Total Service: 3 Yrs, 11Mos, 3Days ????? Previous Discharges: IADT 970315-970919/HD Highest Grade: E2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 31U10 Signal Support Systems Specialist GT: 109 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NIF V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None provided by the applicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 13 March 2000, the unit commander notified the applicant by certified mail of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 135-178, by reason of unsatisfactory participation for accumulating 31 unexcused absences between 12 March 1999 and 6 February 2000, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. He was advised of his rights. The applicant failed to respond or otherwise submit a request for a hearing before an administrative separation board within the time allowed by regulation (AR 135-178, paragraph 2-10b) and thereby waived his rights to a hearing before a board. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with an under other than honorable discharge. On 7 January 2001, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with an under other than honorable discharge. The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve. Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the USAR. Paragraph 13-1 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, however, a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: The evidence of record revealed that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, Army Regulation 135-178, for unsatisfactory participation as a result of numerous unexcused absences from scheduled unit-training assemblies. The analyst also noted that the unit attempted to contact the applicant on several occasions, without success. The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 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 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: 18 February 2010 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: N/A Witnesses/Observers: N/A Exhibits Submitted: N/A 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 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: ????? ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090008001 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 pages