Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/03/12	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 149 submitted by the applicant in lieu of DD Form 293.

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: 071211
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 080317   Chapter: 13    AR: 135-178
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: 3D BCT, 4th Brigade, 75th Div, Birmingham, AL 

Time Lost: None

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  18
Current ENL Date: 051116    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 22Mos, 01Days ?????
Total Service:  		2 Yrs, 28Mos, 18Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 060103-060719/HD
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 21L10/Cable Sys Inst   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Birmingham, AL
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 12 October 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, paragraph 13-1, AR 135-178, by reason of unsatisfactory participant for failure to attend scheduled battle assemblies on 15-16 September 2007, 11-12 August 2007 and 10-11 March 2007 with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The notification memorandum for separation action was sent via certified mail on 12 October 2007 informing the former Soldier  that she had 30 calendar days  after receipt of the notification memorandum to elect her rights.  Failure to deliver a response within 30 days will constitute a waiver of her rights.  The former Soldier's election of rights are not in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity in the legal process.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the service and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable discharge.  On 3 February 2008, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 135-178 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 all the applicant’s military records, 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.  The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of the former Soldier’s service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  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.  
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the medical record and condition during the pregnancy outlined in the documents with her application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that this medical condition did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted, the applicant fully understood the difference between right and wrong when she committed the misconduct that caused the unit commander to initiate the separation action.  
       Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 11 January 2010         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 0    No change 5
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: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090006608
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages