1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 February 2019 b. Date Received: 22 February 2019 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, was improperly discharged duty to a lack of due process, false information when filing, and no probationary period or corrective action offered. The applicant contends that discharge was the result of support channel (mother and father) being incapable of looking after the applicant's child. The applicant contends that the applicant was in communication with unit, requested to be place back into the IRR through the office and was not told there was even a possibility of assistance because the applicant had to relocate. The applicant was overwhelmed with debt, could not afford rent and was forced to drop out of college. The applicant regrets not communicating with chain of command and understands how irresponsible those actions were. However the applicant does not believe was allowed due process. The applicant did not receive any correspondence from unit concerning the discharge. The applicant retained the same phone number and email provided to the unit and did not receive calls or messages concerning any adverse action. The applicant ignorantly and incorrectly assumed that the circumstances were understood and the applicant would be placed back into the IRR. When the applicant found himself in a position to be able to continue service in the reserves, the recruiter informed the applicant of the actions against and the steps needed to take to rectify those actions. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 14 August 2020, 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: 30 April 2013 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 31 August 2012 and again 27 December 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: for failing to attend Annual Training and provide a valid excuse for his absence; Failing to make up missed Battle Assemblies after being given numerous opportunities; Providing no responses to his memorandum of notification; and The commander did not feel that the applicant had the potential to perform useful service if ordered to active duty to meet mobilization requirements The action was suspended for 45 days giving the applicant the opportunity to exercise his rights. He was informed to complete the attached endorsement acknowledging receipt of the action and indicating her election of rights. A copy of the memorandum with the completed endorsement was to be delivered to the address shown on the endorsement within 30 days from the date of his receipt of the memorandum of notification. Any statements or documents he desired to submit in his behalf were to reach the commander within 30 calendar days after he received the memorandum, unless he requested and received an extension for good cause shown. Unless an extension was granted, failure to deliver the completed endorsement within 30 calendar days of the date of his receipt of this memorandum would constitute a waiver of his rights. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: Unsigned Document (5) Administrative Separation Board: Unsigned Document (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 12 April 2013 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 9 March 2011 (USAR) / (until expiration term of service (18 January 2014)) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / GED / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 74D20, Chemical OPS SP / d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 14 February 2006 to 4 June 2010 / HD USARCG, 5 June 2010 to 8 March 2011 / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea f. Awards and Decorations: AAM-2, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR, OSR-2 g. Performance Ratings: None for the period of service under review. h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Affidavit of Service by Mail. Tracking and Confirmations from the United States Postal Service reference documents sent to the applicant. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored statement; listing of supporting documents; unsigned separation packet documents; certified mail receipt; DD Form 214 for his prior period of Active Duty Service; letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated 29 January 2015, reference him being homeless and in the process of being linked with all necessary and appropriated services and resources; and a letter of recommendation. 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 accrue 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 under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline and diminished the quality of his failure to attend AT Initiative or to provide a valid reason for her absence. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance. The applicant seeks relief contending, that he was improperly discharged duty to a lack of due process, false information when filing, and no probationary period or corrective action offered. The applicant contends that his discharge was the result of his support channel (mother and father) being incapable of looking after his child. He contends that he was in communication with his unit, he requested to be place back into the IRR through the office and was not told there was even a possibility of assistance because he had to relocate. He was overwhelmed with debt, could not afford rent and was forced to drop out of college. He regrets not communicating with his chain of command and understand how irresponsible his actions were. However he does not believe that he was allowed due process. He did not receive any correspondence from his unit concerning the discharge. He retained the same phone number and email that he provided the unit and did not receive calls or messages concerning any adverse action. He ignorantly and incorrectly assumed that his circumstance were understood and that he would be place back into the IRR. When he found himself in a position to be able to continue his service in the reserves his recruiter informed him of the actions taken against him and the steps he need to take to rectify his actions. The applicant contentions were noted; 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 this issue. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was improperly discharged or not provided due process. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. 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 her overall service 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 14 August 2020, 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 DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code 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 AR20190004384 5