1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 31 August 2016 b. Date Received: 2 September 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, her discharge is improper because she signed an ETS waiver to be able to deploy in support of Operation New Dawn. Her previous command was unaware of the waiver and gave her an incorrect discharge. By signing the waiver, she volunteered to extend the required time by contract to be able to deploy in support of operations in Iraq. She served honorably and requests her records to be changed to an honorable discharge. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 November 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: NA / AR 135-178 / NA / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 4 October 2012 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: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 November 2005 / 8 years (USAR) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 32 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 6 years, 10 months, 12 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR (23 November 2005 to 26 December 2005) / NA IADT (27 December 2005 to 28 April 2006) / HD USAR (29 April 2006 to 6 January 2011) / NA MOB OND (7 January 2011 to 22 December 2011) / HD USAR (23 December 2011 - Continuous Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (22 January 2011 to 20 November 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; ICM-CS; ASR; OSR; AFSM-M DEV g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Orders 327-2216, dated 23 November 2011, shows that the applicant was released from active duty, effective 22 December 2011, assigned to USARC AUG UNIT DET 84, Fort McPherson, GA, with a terminal date of Reserve Obligation: 22 November 2013. Orders 12-033-00062, dated 2 February 2012, shows the applicant was transferred back to her parent unit after mobilization, effective by VOCG 23 December 2011. Discharge orders, dated 26 September 2012 i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 31 August 2016; Written Agreement - Army Reserve Soldiers Assigned to Mobilizing Units, dated 3 December 2010; DD Form 214 w/ending date 22 December 2011; discharge orders, dated 26 September 2012; and mobilization orders, dated 21 December 2010. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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 accrued 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. The characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldier's service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization. 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 her general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and 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 her discharge from the US Army Reserve. However, the record contains a properly constituted discharge orders. This document identifies the characterization of the discharge as general (under honorable conditions) under the provisions of AR 135-178, and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The applicant contends her discharge was improper because she signed an ETS waiver to be able to deploy in support of Operation New Dawn. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support her issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that she may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. 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 the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 1 November 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 AR20160015448 1