RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 October 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070007068 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano Director Mr. Mohammed R. Elhaj Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Ms. Susan A. Powers Chairperson Mr. Edward E. Montgomery Member Mr. Qawiy A. Sabree Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, correction of her records to show that she was separated due to the lack of family care plan under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) instead of a hardship discharge in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve Enlisted Administrative Separations). 2. The applicant states that she requested to be discharged due to the lack of a family care plan in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 but she was not. She further adds that had she been discharged under the correct article, she would not have incurred a Department of Defense debt. 3. The applicant did not provide a copy of the letter from the Department of Defense informing her of a debt, however, she provided a copy of her discharge orders in support of her application. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's records show that she enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 16 April 2003 for a period of 6 years for military occupational specialty (MOS) 91W (Health care Specialist). However, due to academic failure of MOS 91W during advanced individual training, she was re-trained and awarded MOS 91E (Dental Specialist) on 2 July 2004. 2. The applicant's records show that she was assigned to the 965th Dental Company, Seagoville, Texas, a subordinate element of the 807th Medical Command, Seagoville, Texas, with a headquarters as the Army Reserve Medical Command, Pinellas Park, Florida. 3. On 10 June 2006, the applicant submitted a DA Form 4651-R (Request for Reserve Component Assignment or Attachment) requesting discharge for dependency/hardship. She attached a statement describing how she and her spouse, both military, would be deployed at the same time and that the deployment would cause separation from her one-year old daughter which would not be in the best interests of the family. The applicant also provided two other statements from her relatives describing the hardships she and her family would endure if she was not discharged. 4. On 18 September 2006, the Human Resources Officer, Headquarters, 807th Medical Command, Seagoville, Texas, recommended approval and the separation authority approved the hardship discharge. 5. On 27 September 2006, Headquarters, Army Reserve Medical Command, published Orders 06-270-00027 honorably discharging the applicant in accordance with Army Regulation 135-178. 6. There is no record that the applicant requested separation due to the lack of a family care plan. 7. Army Regulation 135-178 sets policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. Paragraph 6-2 of this regulation covers discharge for dependency or hardship. It states in pertinent part that upon the request of a Soldier and approval of the separation authority, separation may be directed when it is considered that continued membership and service on active duty (AD), full-time National Guard duty (FTNGD), or active duty for training (ADT), would result in genuine dependency or undue hardship. Separation may be approved when all of the following circumstances exist: (1) The hardship or dependency is not temporary; (2) Conditions have arisen or have been aggravated to an excessive degree since entry in the Army, and the Soldier has made every reasonable effort to remedy the situation; (3) The administrative separation will eliminate or materially alleviate the condition; and (4) There are no other means of alleviation reasonably available. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that she requested separation due to the lack of a family care plan and not due to a hardship. 2. Evidence of record shows that the applicant willingly requested discharge due to hardship. In her request, she indicated that she experienced a hardship involving of a member of her family and that separation from the service would materially affect the care or support of her family by materially alleviating undue hardship. Additionally, the applicant met the conditions for parenthood. At the time of her request, she was a married Soldier, who became a parent by birth, and whose child was under the age of 18 and residing in the same household. 3. The evidence confirms that the applicant’s reason for separation was determined based on hardship under the provisions of chapter 6, Army Regulation 135-178. Therefore, she received the appropriate separation authority and reason for separation. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __sap___ __eem___ __qas___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. Susan A. Powers ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070007068 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20071004 TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD) DATE OF DISCHARGE 20060925 DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 135-178 DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION (DENY) REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 144.0000 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.