Application Receipt Date: 060331 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293. The applicant states that she was led to believe that she could have custody of her child once she completed AIT. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 030317 Chapter: 8 AR: 635-200 Reason: Pregnancy or Childbirth RE: SPD: MDF Unit/Location: ????? Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 810403 Current ENL Date: 001109 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 2 Yrs, 4 Mos, 9 Days ????? Total Service: 2 Yrs, 4 Mos, 9 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E4 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 77F10 GT: 84 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None were submitted. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The specific facts and circumstances leading to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records. Evidence of record shows that on 5 March 2003, Orders 064-0111, DA, Headquarters, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), and Fort campbell, Fort Campbell, Kentucky 42223-5000, released the applicant from the Regular Army, effective: 17 March 2003, and transferred her to the United Army Reserves Control Group (ANLTNG) AR-PERSCOM, 9700 Page Ave, St. Louis, MO 63132. The record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. Her DD Form 214 indicates that she was released from active duty under the provisions of Chapter 8, AR 635-200, by reason of pregnancy, with an honorable discharge. Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of MDF (i.e., pregnancy or childbirth), with a reentry (RE) code of "3." b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200, provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 8, established policy procedures, and provides authority for voluntarily separation of enlisted women because of pregnancy. This Chapter applies to all Active Army enlisted women and ARNGUS and USAR enlisted women ordered to AD or ADT, except for ARNGUS and USAR Soldiers found to be pregnant upon entry on IADT, to whom paragraph 5-11 applies. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: The applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to her release from active duty. However, the applicant’s record contains a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. This document identifies the reason and characterization of service granted and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process releasing her from active duty. The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that the applicant was released from active duty under the provisions of Chapter 8, AR 635-200, by reason of pregnancy with a characterization of service of honorable. In order to have been eligible for a hardship discharge the applicant would have been required to meet the criteria established under the provisions Chapter 6, AR 635-200, and there is no evidence that she pursued a discharge conditioned on a hardship. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. There is no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The analyst noted the applicant’s issues; however, did not find said issues sufficiently mitigating to warrant a change to the narrative reason for discharge. The analyst determined that the narrative reason for separation was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 31 January 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: N/A Witnesses/Observers: N/A Exhibits Submitted: N/A VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change No change (Character) Change No change (Reason) (Board member names available upon request) IX. 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 not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. John Zangas, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: None Other: None RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: None XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: ROBERT L. HOUSE Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 2 February 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060004603 Applicant Name: Ms. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 5 pages