1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 24 February 2016 b. Date Received: 26 February 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, her discharge was inadequate because it was based on unsatisfactory participation, when she was advised that she was excused from drill to attend the New Jersey Department of Corrections (NJDOC) Academy. After completing the academy, she continued to attend drill. Later, she had received paperwork in the mail informing her that she had accrued unexcused absences. She was told to disregard the notices by her unit administrator. He informed the applicant that if she continued to attend drill regularly again that the unexcused absences would go away and that she had nothing to worry about. One day in November, after just attending drill, she received another packet in the mail stating that she was being discharged from the military. Consequently, she was discharged when she had no intention of separating from service. The applicant has been trying to apply for the NJ State Trooper Academy, however she is automatically disqualified due to having an other than honorable discharge. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 May 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unsatisfactory Participation / AR 135- 178 / Chapter 13 / NIF / NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 25 November 2014 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 September 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant accrued nine of more unexcused absences from scheduled inactive duty training during a one-year period. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 January 2010 / 8 years (USAR) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist / 4 years, 9 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: 27 January 2010 to 13 April 2010 / NA IADT, 14 April 2010 to 9 September 2010 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of her under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the former Soldier's discharge from the Army. Barring evidence to the contrary, the presumption of government regularity shall prevail, as it appears that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant's contentions about being told to disregard the notifications of unexcused absences were carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence available in the official record to make a determination upon the applicant's quality of service. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence, to support a change to the characterization of service granted. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant requests a narrative reason change. However, members of the USAR are discharged from service with use of discharge orders. These orders do not reflect a narrative reason. Insomuch as the orders do not reflect a narrative reason, there is no basis to grant relief. The applicant contends that an upgrade of her discharge will allow her to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be her responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. Based on the available record, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 3 May 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160005183 3