Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/07/14	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: Through counsel, in effect the applicant states, her discharge is inequitable because the Army never notified her that she was being discharged; therefore, she was never given the opportunity to be heard.  Proper procedure was not followed when processing the applicant’s discharge.  The applicant had no intention of shirking her duties or obligations and attempted to abide by the Reserve Unit’s regulations.  The applicant’s reserve unit never answered or returned her repeated attempts to contact them.  The remarks made by the applicant’s commanding officer should be given not weight because his comments are hearsay and are unsupported by corroborating evidence.  The applicant contends she missed drill due to a dispute with her roommate.  The applicant’s otherwise laudable service renders the other than honorable discharge inequitable.

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: 070415
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 070614   Chapter:  13      AR: 135-178
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NIF   Unit/Location: 320th CM CO, Fort Totten, NY 

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:  23
Current ENL Date: 070212    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	   0  Yrs, 4  Mos,   2  Days ?????
Total Service:  		  1   Yrs, 9  Mos, 28  Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ADT 050616 - 060706/HD (Applicant's record shows 320 days of ADT, orders NIF)
                                     USAR 060707 - 070209/NA
                                        ADT 070210 - 070211/NA (Continuous service)
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 25U10 Signal Support Systems Specialist   GT: 112   EDU: HS Equivalent   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Brooklyn, NY
Post Service Accomplishments: None








VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record the applicant provided shows that on 15 April 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 135-178, unsatisfactory participation, for failing to attend drill (070331, 070303, 070304, 070120, and 070121) without offering a cogent or emergency reason which prevented her from attending drills, with an other than under honorable conditions discharge.  She was advised of her rights.  
       
       The applicant's election of rights is not in the file and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.
       
       The evidence provided indicates that on 14 June 2007, DA HQS, 77th Regional Readiness Command, Fort Totten, NY, Orders number 07-165-00053, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 2 June 2007, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  The record contains a properly constituted Order which indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of paragraph 13-1, AR 135-178, by reason of unsatisfactory participation.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier.  Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate, however, a fully honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       The evidence of record provided by the applicant revealed that she was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, Army Regulation 135-178, for unsatisfactory participation as a result of unexcused absences from scheduled unit-training assemblies.  
       
       The analyst considered the applicant’s entire length of service and acknowledges her in service accomplishments as stated in her application.  However, the analyst did not find the said issue sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review.  
       
       The applicant contends there were mitigating circumstances which contributed to her unsatisfactory participation.  Specifically, she claims stress at home resulted in her discharge.  While the applicant may believe her stress at home was the underlying cause of her unsatisfactory participation, the evidence does not demonstrate that she sought relief from stress through her command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers.  Likewise, she has provided no evidence that she should not be held responsible for her unsatisfactory participation.
       
       The analyst also noted the unit commander attempted to contact the applicant on at least two occasions via certified mail.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulations were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       The analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command.  The analyst was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined 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: ?????         Location: Washington, D. C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel:  [ redacted ] 

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: DD Form 293 with a self-authored statement, statement from counsel, and portions of the discharge packet.

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















Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20100019109
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages