Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2012/03/15 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant, states in effect, that the original paperwork was submitted for hardship because her husband was serving in Iraq at the time and she was also pregnant. Additionally, she states that she was going through some tests for possible breast cancer. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Tender Offer: None See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 041115 Discharge Received: Date: 050628 Chapter: 13 AR: 135-178 Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation RE: SPD: NA Unit/Location: 469th Med Co, Wichita, KS 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: 20 Current ENL Date: 010625 Current ENL Term: 5 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 04 Yrs, 00 Mos, 04 Days ????? Total Service: 07 Yrs, 00 Mos, 04 Days ????? Previous Discharges: RA 980625-010624/HD Highest Grade: E-4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 92G10/Food Svc Spc GT: 91 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Korea Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR, OSR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? 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 which led to her discharge from the Army Reserve. The record indicates that on 28 June 2005, DA HQS, 89th Regional Readiness Command, Wichita, Kansas, Orders number 015-179-00030, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 28 June 2005, with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. The record contains a properly constituted Order which indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions AR 135-178, for Unsatisfactory Participation. The applicant provided excerpts of her separation packet that indicate that on 15 November 2004, the unit commander notified her of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 135-178, by reason of unsatisfactory participation, for having nine unexcused absences within a one year period and gave the applicant until 20 December 2004 to respond. The applicant acknowledged notification on 17 November 2004. In essence, she was being advised of her rights via certified mail. The applicant’s election of rights was not provided with the application and is not contained in the available record; thus, the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. On 28 June 2005, DA HQS, 89th Regional Readiness Command discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve. Chapter 13 of the 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 and attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in— the Soldier’s refusal to comply with orders or correspondence; or a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier has failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed. Discharge action may be taken when the Soldier cannot be located or is absent in the hands of civil authorities in accordance with the provisions of AR 135-91, paragraph 2-18, and Chapter 3, section IV, of AR 135–178. 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: After a careful review of all the applicant’s available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors which would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge. On 28 June 2005, DA HQS, 89th Regional Readiness Command, Wichita, Kansas, Orders number 015-179-00030, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 28 June 2005, with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. All the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. The applicant contends that her husband was deployed at the time; that she was pregnant and was being screened for possible breast cancer. However, all of the facts pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will still be her responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the complete discharge packet, verification of husband’s deployment, medical documents that would validate her contention of having a medical condition that caused her absences from scheduled drills, and other documents confirming her pregnancy, since all the evidence is not available in the official record. Therefore, based on the available evidence, the analyst presumes government regularity in the discharge process and concludes that it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 8 August 2012 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: Discharge orders, part of her discharge packet, hardship statement, personal statement, and reduction orders. 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 Board Vote: Character - Change 1 No change 4 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X. Board Action Directed 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 Approval Authority: ARCHIE L. DAVIS III Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board BONITA E. TROTMAN Lieutenant Colonel, U. S. Army Secretary Recorder ????? Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20120005999 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 3 pages