Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/01/21	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant. The Applicant states, "I first applied for a transfer to Michigan in June or July 2002 because I would be attending graduate school there in August 2002.  I kept in contact with my unit in  Durham, NC (810th Med Co DS) via telephone and completed annual training with them as well.  I was advised by the Unit Administrator to RST with a nearby unit until he heard something back (SGT Kenneth Thaxton).  I RST'd in Lansing for almost 2 years and was advised by my unit that they kept re-submitting the request and did not hear anything.  In April 2004, I informed them that I was pregnant and would be moving to Grand Rapids, MI.  I moved to Grand Rapids in May 2004 to start a new job and because I had graduated Gruaduate School.  I was informed by SGT Thaxton that he still had not heard anything from the 81st or 88th RSC.  I did not continue RST drills because driving long distances made me car sick and I was sick all of the time.  I had my son in December 2004 and was getting adjusted to being a single parent, away from family and friends.  I then received a letter from my new unit in April 2005 in the middle of packing to move back to Fayetteville, NC in May 2005.  Upon my arrival in North Carolina, I attempted to contact my new unit out of Kalamazoo, MI to advise them of my change in address and to request a new duty assignment.  At one point, I spoke with a neighboring unit and was advised that they were deployed.  At another point I was advised that they were at annual training.  All the while, I had been leaving messages on the answering machine for someone to call me back and never received a response.  I also called to the 88th RSC to find out who I needed to speak to about my situation and I was advised to just keep calling the unit.  I finally found out that I was discharged by trying to register for a health program and they advised me of my status.  To this date, I have not received any discharge paperwork and do not understand how this could have happened if I tried to stay in contact with my new unit.  I believe that the problem began with it taking 3 years for me to receive a transfer of duty assignment. If there is any other information needed from me, other than what should be apparent in the computer, please advise me of this and I will be more than happy to get it for you." 

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 061026   Chapter: NIF       AR: 635-200
Reason: NIF	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: HQs, US Army Reserve Command Ft. McPherson, GA 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 990721    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  (USAR)
Current ENL Service: 	6 Yrs, 3Mos, 5Days ?????
Total Service:  		6 Yrs, 3Mos, 5Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	IADT 000210-000915/HD (concurrent service)
Highest Grade: E3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 91E10 Dental Spec   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Browns Summit, NC
Post Service Accomplishments: The Applicant states she completed graduate school, no documents submitted.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
             The evidence shows the applicant’s record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to her discharge from the Army Reserve.  The record indicates that on 26 October 2006, DA HQS, Army Reserve Command, Ft. McPherson, GA, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 26 October 2006, with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  The record contains a properly constituted Order as described above.  It indicates that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of 135-178, with a characterization service of under honorable conditions (general).   
       

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
             Army Regulation 135-78 govern procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve.  Chapter 8 of NGR 600-200 covers, in pertinent part, reasons for discharge and separation of enlisted personnel from the USAR.  Paragraph 13-1 of that regulation provides in pertinent part that individuals can be separated for being an unsatisfactory participant.   Army Regulation 135-91 states that a member is an unsatisfactory participant when nine or more unexcused absences from scheduled drills occur during a 1 year period.  Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, but a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.
       

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       After a careful review of the applicant’s available records for the period of enlistment under review, and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  On 26 October 2006, DA HQS, Army Reserve Command, Ft. McPherson, GA discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 26 October 2006, with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  All the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not contained in the available records and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process. Furthermore, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain all the specific documents that would indicate the reason for the separation action from the United States Army. If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 2009/10/23         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.  
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 1    No change 4
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090001803
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages