1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 11 August 2016 b. Date Received: 15 August 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, at the time of his discharge, his mother was going through cancer treatments in Texas. He states that he was her caregiver and he had to work two jobs in order to pay for the back and forth travel from Austin to Houston. He had to pay for her nursing center for her to stay in Houston during the whole ordeal. He states this was the toughest time of his life and he stayed in constant communication during the whole process. He continues to care for his mother and does not regret his decisions. He states he was not able to attend drills during this period. He had lost his father to cancer and was thankful that he was able to pay for the best cancer treatment in the world. He states, he served honorably and deployed to Iraq and Kuwait. He desires to become a firefighter and has all the necessary training, but he does not qualify due to his discharge. He believes he should not be punished for taking care of his family. He loves his mother and she suffers from many conditions and he asks the Board to understand the decision he was faced with. He loved the Army and is saddened by his discharge, but he does not blame his unit, as they did what they had to do. He simply requests a bit of help from the Board so that he can better his life. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 18 October 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 Participant / AR 135- 178 / Chapter 13 / NA / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 September 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: The applicant was sent a notification, dated 10 April 2013, via certified mail on 3 June 2013. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He had accrued at least 9 unexcused absences from Army Reserve battle assemblies within a one-year period and a Notice directing him to respond to the Commander was sent to his last known address was returned as undeliverable. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant failed to respond to the notice to appear before the Administrative Separation Board, which was sent to the applicant via certified mail on 3 June 2013. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 8 July 2013 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 10 February 2009 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 29 / HS Graduate / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92S10, Shower / Laundry / Clothing Repair Specialist / 9 years, 17 days (USAR) d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 14 February 2002 - 5 August 2006 / GD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Afghanistan (21 January 2003 - 20 May 2004) f. Awards and Decorations: NCOPDR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Personnel Action form, dated 16 August 2012, reflects the applicant was reduced from E-4 to E-3, for failure to comply with: Article 192, under UCMJ: Failure to obey order or regulation: Article 87, under UCMJ: Missing movement; and, AR 135-91, Chapter 4, Section Ill, paragraph 4-16, Unexcused absence from annual training. The applicant's separation proceedings contain a memorandum, dated 10 January 2013, that served as the counseling and FLAG authorization for the Unsatisfactory Participant Soldiers listed therein. The applicant's name was not reflected in the memorandum. TL History report, dated 9 April 2013, reflects the applicant had several "U" (Unexcused absences) between 1 October 2011 and 25 February 2013. Email from the US Postal Service, dated 6 June 2013, reflects that certified mail was delivered to an unspecified address in San Antonio, Texas on 3 June 2013. The email did not reflect the intended recipient of the certified mail. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 and a copy of his discharge orders. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve. Chapter 13 provides in pertinent part, that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant. AR 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills acrue during a one-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 possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends that he was having family issues that affected his behavior and ultimately caused him to be discharged. However, he had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. The applicant contends that he was in constant contact with his unit during his absences. However, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the type of discharge he received from the U.S. Army Reserve. The applicant contends that he had good service which included a combat tour. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 18 October 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 new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160014524 1