Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2010/10/25	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The applicant states, "While in AIT at Fort Sam Houston, TX I had gotten injured and was prescribed physical therapy to take place at Brooke Army Medical Center. I had received a profile limiting me to no lower body physical activity other than walking until I completed physical therapy. I received orders to return home to the [ redacted ] before completing physical therapy and had to complete on my own when I returned home. I had to start a new job after returning to pay for bills that accumulated while at AIT. Since I never in processed into the unit I never received an intro packet to include a schedule of upcoming drills.  Drills would be emailed to me at random and they changed as so. The first couple of drills I talked to the SGT on duty for those weekend and they were all excused absences. Each time I called the unit I had given them my new address and phone number. They never inputted my new number as they also reverted back to calling my old number. I never received calls as in my file it clearly states on my counseling statements that the phone number is no longer in service, yet clearly marked on the top of the statement my new number is written. I then spoke to the [ redacted ] CSH Retention NCO who after a lengthy conversation came to the conclusion that ordering me to the IRR was going to be the best course of action for me to get things back on track and then return to service as I never intended to leave the reserves. That was the last contact I ever had received from any member of the [ redacted ]. Then in November of 2009 they sent out a package to my old address (after multiple conversations giving them my new information) containing my military file with all personnel information to include my SSN, all work history, all information to steal my identity. The [ redacted ] CSH UA and AUA not only sent my records to the wrong address in which the person living there knew how to get a hold of me but included in my file were papers pertaining to another soldiers life insurance information to include all his information. All information is still in my position, as you will see copies of all. This should clearly show all the misunderstanding that had taken place and the poor file and record keeping that the [ redacted ] has in place."

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: 090805
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 091103   Chapter: 13       AR: 635-200
Reason: Unsatisfactory Participation	   RE:     SPD: NA   Unit/Location: Co B, 405th Combat Support Hospital, West Hartford, CT 

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:  27
Current ENL Date: 070731    Current ENL Term: 8 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	2 Yrs, 03Mos, 02Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 00Mos, 02Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	ADT 070823-080623/ HD
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 68W10 Health Care Spec   GT: 114   EDU: NIF   Overseas: NIF   Combat: NIF
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Oakville, CT
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 5 August 2009, the unit commander notified the applicant via mailing of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of unsatisfactory participant, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge with a suspense date of 21 September 2009.  A second notice was sent by certified mail, was refused, unclaimed or otherwise undelivered.  
       
       The applicant's election of rights is not contained in the available record and the analyst presumed government regularity in the discharge process.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  
       
       On 9 September 2009, the separation authority directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
       
       The record indicates that on 3November 2009, DA HQS, Headquarters, 3d Medical Deployment Support Command, Forest Park, GA, Orders number 09-307-00012, discharged the applicant from the Army Reserve, effective 3 Novemebr 2009, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. 

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
       Army Regulation 135-178 governs 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, however, a general discharge under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
       The evidence of record revealed that the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 13, Army Regulation 135-178, for unsatisfactory participation as a result of numerous unexcused absences from scheduled unit-training assemblies.  The analyst also noted the unit commander attempted to contact the applicant on several occasions, without success.  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.  
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue about his physical therapy and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review.
       
       The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he spoke to the 405th CSH Retention NCO who after a lengthy conversation came to the conclusion that ordering him to the IRR was going to be the best course of action.  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: 24 February 2011         Location: Dallas, TX

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel:  [ redacted ]

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: Documents received from the applicant on 5 Jan 2011 of his separation notification, counseling forms, letters of instruction - unexcused absences, faxed document from the Office of the Inspector General, Fort Gillem, GA, three character reference letters, two email from [ redacted ], DA Form 3725

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony 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 2    No change 3
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 AR20100024554
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages