APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that her nine unexcused absences for drills during the period November 1991 through January 1992 be reevaluated and changed.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that she was activated to serve in Operation Desert Storm; that, while serving with the 892d Transportation (Trans) Company (Co) in Saudia Arabia, she became pregnant and was sent home; that she received a letter, dated 24 July 1991, stating that she was reassigned to the 657th Trans Co, with her first drill date as 3 August 1991; that she attended the August, September, and October drills; that, during the month of November, she started to experience complications; that she was placed in the hospital on 26 November 1991 for bleeding and placed on bed rest until her next check-up which was 10 December 1991; that, while assigned to the 657th Trans Co, her unit incorrectly administered unexcused absences to her records; that she mailed the unit a doctor’s note, but still received unexcused absences and was later discharged; that she received a letter from the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) stating that she was being discharged due to unsatisfactory conduct and participation; that, immediately after she received her 6 week check-up from the doctor, she notified the IRR and asked to be put back into a unit; that, in April 1991, she was assigned to the 159th Aviation (Avn) Regiment (Regt); and that she has drilled with that unit for 3 years. She alleges that these absences should have been recorded as excused due to her pregnancy; that the unit was aware of her situation per hospital reports and doctor’s statements, but failed to implement the appropriate administrative procedures; that she should have been excused from 19 December 1991 through 4 March 1992 since her due date was 16 January 1992; that her unit was aware of her due date; and that she didn’t have to do nothing special to get the leave although she did have other circumstances involved.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's available military records obtained from the applicant’s U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) unit show:

On 25 May 1988, the applicant enlisted in the USAR for 8 years.

A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) indicates that the applicant served on active duty from 4 February 1991 through 11 June 1991 in support of Operation Desert Shield/Storm.

Orders, dated 26 June 1991, indicate that the applicant was transferred from the 102d USAR Command, St. Louis, Missouri, to the 657th Trans Co in Illinois effective 30 May 1991 (sic).  On 14 February 1992, she was reassigned from the 657th Trans Co to the USAR Control Group (Annual Training (AT), St. Louis, for unsatisfactory participation.  On 6 April 1992, she was released from the USAR Control Group (AT), St. Louis, and assigned to the 159th Avn Regt in Illinois.

Documentation submitted by the applicant indicates that she was admitted to St. Luke’s Hospital on 26 November 1991.  A notation on the form indicates that “she had went into 
pre-labor, but the labor was stopped.”  (Note:  It cannot be determined who made the notation on the form.)

A copy of a document submitted by the applicant from the Women’s Health Care Associates, Inc., indicates that the applicant’s due date was 16 January 1992.  A notation on the document indicates that she was under doctor’s care and placed on bed rest for the period 27 November 1991 to 10 December 1991.  (Note:  It cannot be determined who made the notation on the form.)

The Office of the Chief, Army Reserve, in a comment (COPY ATTACHED) to the Board, advised that it appears that the applicant failed to submit any documentation from her physician which stated that she was unable to attend drills; and that there is no evidence that she informed the commander of her condition or that she was counseled and informed of any rights, privileges, and benefits for which she may be eligible.  Denial of her request was recommended.

Army Regulation 135-91 (Service Obligations, Methods of Fulfillment, Participation Requirements, and Enforcement Procedures) prescribes policies and procedures governing the various types of service obligations and participation requirements.  Paragraph 4-5 provides that absence from scheduled drills, training periods, or AT may be excused.  Such absences may be excused when sickness, injury, or some other circumstance beyond the soldier’s control caused the absence.  Paragraph 4-11 provides that a soldier is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a l-year period. Paragraph 4-25 provides, in pertinent part, that a pregnant soldier will continue to perform duties during the prenatal period.  Performance of duty will continue until it is no longer considered feasible by her unit commander.  In making this decision, the unit commander will consider the written statement of her attending physician.  When this decision is made, the soldier will be excused from drills.  Normally, the prenatal leave period will not exceed 4 weeks. If the soldier wishes to be excused earlier, she will submit a written request to her unit commander for approval.  Her request must include her physician’s written statement.  A unit commander may extend the prenatal period beyond 4 weeks.  This extension is based on the commander’s decision that the soldier is not physically able to continue in duty status.  Maternity leave during the postnatal period normally will not exceed 6 weeks from date of release from the hospital.  If the attending physician determines it necessary to extend this period, he or she will provide a statement to that effect.  The soldier will send her written request, with the physician’s statement, to her unit commander for approval.  Maternity leave will end on the date the unit commander determines the soldier is medically fit to return to duty.  The unit commander will make this decision with the attending physician’s advice.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.


2.  The available military records obtained from the applicant’s USAR unit do not contain any documentation pertaining to the applicant’s pregnancy or documentation from her physician or other medical authorities.  Therefore, in absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board concludes that she apparently failed to submit any documentation from her physician which stated that she was unable to attend drills.  Also, from her statement, it appears that she felt that she did not have to do anything special to get her leave.

3.  Since the applicant was reassigned to the USAR Control Group (AT), St. Louis, on 14 February 1992 for unsatisfactory participation, it appears that she had nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills.

4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director