1. APPLICANT’S NAME: a. Application Date: 27 May 2015 b. Date Received: 28 May 2015 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, REASON, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests to change the discharge code from a pregnancy code (PC) to a hardship code on her discharge and transfer orders from the ARNG to USAR. The applicant states, in effect and in pertinent part, the reason for the change is as a result of her family being relocated from Massachusetts, to Idaho. The nearest Idaho Army National Guard unit with her job skill was a three-hour drive from Hailey, ID. Since she was unable to commute back to Massachusetts to complete training to remain in good standing with the MAARNG, she was told her only option was to discharge into the IRR. Since she was pregnant, she was discharged under a pregnancy code. She feels she should have been discharged under a hardship code since the relocation to a remote area made her continued service impossible. If not for her move to Idaho, she would still be serving in the MAARNG. Documentary evidence shows her intent and attempts to transfer from the Massachusetts Army National Guard to the Idaho Army National Guard, when her family was relocated due to her spouse's work assignment. Upon learning about the relocation in November 2012, she informed her chain of command the relocation would hinder her ability to remain an active participant in her aviation unit because of the requirement to meet the minimum flying hours. Not only would it be difficult for her to travel across country each month, the cost associated with this travel would exceed her duty pay, creating a hardship for her family. It was her intent to find an aviation unit in Idaho through an interstate transfer to continue her service. After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of service under review, the Board determined the assignment and loss reason cited on the applicant’s transfer orders was inequitable based on the applicant’s length and quality of her service to include her combat service, and the circumstances surrounding the transfer orders, i.e., the distance between her residence and unit (Idaho and Massachusetts) constituted a financial hardship and her discharge from the Army National Guard and transfer to the Army Reserve was not due to pregnancy, but due to hardship. Accordingly, in a Personal Appearance hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 8 February 2016, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board voted to grant relief by changing the assignment/loss code to “HA,” hardship reasons. Further, the Army Discharge Review Board under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553, recommends through the Chief, National Guard Bureau, to the Adjutant General, State of Massachusetts, the applicant be considered for a change to her discharge/transfer orders by issuing an amended orders to the applicant which reflects the following change to Orders 210-001, dated 29 July 2013: Change the “Assignment/Loss Code” from “PC” to “HA” for hardship reasons. (Board member names available upon request.) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason/Authority/Codes/Characterization: (Per Orders 210-001): Separation and Transfer / AR 135-91, Paragraph 4(24) / PC / NA / Honorable (Per NGB Form 22 for period of service from 1 April 2008 through 24 July 2013): Resignation / NGR 635-100, Paragraph 5a(3) / NA / RE-2 / Honorable b. Date of Discharge/Transfer: 24 July 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: NIF 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date/Period of Enlistment: 1 April 2008 / NIF b. Age at Enlistment/Education/GT Score: 26 / Bachelor of Arts degree / NA c. Highest Grade Achieved/MOS/Total Service: WO-2 / 153MO, UH-60M-Pilot / 11 years, 3 months, 23 days d. Prior Service/Characterizations: ARNG (2 April 2002-27 May 2002) / NA           IET     (28 May 200-4 December 2002) / NIF           ARNG (5 December 2002-6 December 2003) / NA           MOB   (7 December 2003-14 February 2005) / NIF           ARNG (15 February 2005-5 June 2005) / NIF           AGR    (6 June 2005-31 May 2006) / NIF           ARNG (1 June 2006-31 March 2008) / NIF e. Overseas Service/Combat Service: NIF f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM; AAM; ARCAM; AGCM; NDSM; GWOTSM; AFRM-M DEV; ASR; OSR; MUC; MA-DSM; MA-DEFER g. Performance Ratings: 1 April 2008-22 July 2010, Satisfactory Performance, Promote                 10 September 2010-31 August 2011, Outstanding      Performance, Must Promote      1 September 2011-31 August 2012, Outstanding Performance,      Must Promote h. Disciplinary Action(s)/Evidentiary Record: Discharge Orders and NGB Form 22, dated 24 July 2013. i. Lost Time: NA j. Diagnosed PTSD/TBI/Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Applicant’s self-authored statement; Discharge/Transfer Orders 210-001 and NGB Form 22, dated 29 July 2013, for service under current review; e-mail correspondence, dated 11 and 19 May 2015; applicant’s request for review of loss code, dated 15 April 2015; memorandum, dated 31 March 2015, subject: Separation Reason Code Change Request; CMD letter, dated 11 February 2015; applicant’s self-authored statement, dated 22 January 2015; Special Orders Number 187 AR, dated 30 July 2013; applicant’s intent for IST statement, dated 16 January 2013; e-mail correspondence, dated 5 and 4 December 2012; e-mail correspondence, dated 27, 25, 24 March, 1 February, and 23 January 2013; e-mail correspondence, dated 11 and 10 April 2013; and e-mail correspondence, dated 1 May 2013. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant’s records indicate, she was transferred from the USAR Control Group (REINF) to a battalion in Marysville, WA, effective 5 August 2014; orders, dated 15 October 2015, effecting her performance of aviation service and entitlement to the Aviation Career Incentive Pay (ACIP) on 26 June 2014; and designated a special qualification identifier (SQI) of 8, effective 10 June 2006, as classification of USAR Warrant Officer status. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): National Guard Regulation 635-100, Personnel Separations, prescribes policies, criteria, and procedures governing separation of commissioned officers of the Army National Guard. It stipulates, the termination of an officer’s appointment in the Army National Guard is a function of the State. Unless contrary to State law and regulations, the appointment of an Army National Guard officer should be terminated, in pertinent part, for resignation. Paragraph 5a(3) for resignation, states an officer may tender a resignation through channels to the State adjutant general (AG), and if accepted, the State AG will publish orders separating the officer from the National Guard appointment. Army Regulation 135-91, Service Obligations, Methods of Fulfillment, Participation Requirements, and Enforcement Procedures, prescribes policies and procedures governing the various type of service obligations and participation requirements for and defines Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and US Army Reserve (USAR) service obligations. In pertinent part, the specific and overall responsibilities for general officer commanders for USAR Soldiers and State AG for ARNGUS Soldiers monitor methods of fulfilling the Reserve of the Army service obligations and participations requirements, and they hold approval authority for exceptions to unexcused absences. Chapter 4, Section IV, Leave of Absence, paragraph 4-24, provides policy for Soldiers failing to obtain assignment, in that it applies when Soldiers are not assigned or enlisted in another unit. On the 95th day after the effective date of leave of absence, the Solder may be reassigned/transferred to the IRR. Chapter 4, Section V, paragraph 4-25, provides policy for pregnancy. 8. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE(S): The applicant requests to change her discharge code from a pregnancy code (PC) to a hardship code. The applicant’s available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. However, the service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to her discharge from the Army National Guard. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that the command's action was erroneous The applicant seeks relief contending, the reason for the change is as a result of her family being relocated from Massachusetts, to Idaho. The nearest Idaho Army National Guard unit with her job skill was a three-hour drive from Hailey, ID. Since she was unable to commute back to Massachusetts to complete training to remain in good standing with the MAARNG, she was told her only option was to discharge into the IRR. Since she was pregnant, she was discharged under a pregnancy code. She feels she should have been discharged under a hardship code since the relocation to a remote area made her continued service impossible. If not for her move to Idaho, she would still be serving in the MAARNG. Documentary evidence shows her intent and attempts to transfer from the Massachusetts Army National Guard to the Idaho Army National Guard, when her family was relocated due to her spouse's work assignment. Upon learning about the relocation in November 2012, she informed her chain of command as it would hinder her ability to remain an active participant in her aviation unit because of the requirement to meet the minimum flying hours. Not only would it be difficult for her to travel across country each month, the cost associated with this travel would exceed her duty pay, creating a hardship for her family. It was her intent to find an aviation unit in Idaho through an interstate transfer to continue her service. The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. However, the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, which would include any applicant to her command for a hardship discharge for the Board's consideration. In the current circumstances, the evidence presented indicates the issue the applicant submitted regarding a change to her assignment/loss code on her discharge orders is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge or termination from the Army National Guard Federal Recognition status because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued, because she was transferred to the USAR Control Group. Further, she presented no issues regarding her discharge from the Army National Guard on the basis of a resignation under the provisions of National Guard Regulation 635-100, paragraph 5a(3). The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. The applicant submitted no additional documents or contentions. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New NGB-22: Yes b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: Hardship d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore Grade to: NA AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: COL, US ARMY Presiding Officer Army Discharge Review Board Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School OAD - Ordered to Active Duty SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 HD - Honorable Discharge OMPF - Official Military Personnel File TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP – Military Police PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS – Entry Level Status IADT – Initial Active Duty Training RE - Reentry UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable SCM - Summary Court Martial ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20150008441 1