IN THE CASE OF:  	Mr. 

      BOARD DATE:  	17 April 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130000535
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.



      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade to his discharge from under other than honorable conditions to general, under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he believes his discharge should be upgraded due to an injury he received while on active duty which keep him from training.  He contends he informed his command of his need for medical attention with his shoulder injury, however, he was not provided any assistance.  He also contends that because of transportation issue he was unable to attend training which he made his unit aware of.  He believes he has been a loyal Soldier who has served almost 7 years to include JROTC for four years and has received many awards from boot camp and JROTC.  
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		17 December 2012			
b. Discharge Received:		Under Other Than Honorable Conditions		
c. Date of Discharge:			7 September 2011				
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Unsatisfactory Participation, AR 135-178, Chapter    							13	
e. Unit of assignment: 			824th QM Co, Fort Bragg, NC	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	14 July 2009, until completion of reserve/military 						service obligation of (130403)		
g. Current Enlistment Service:	2 years, 1 month, 24 days	
h. Total Service:			6 years, 5 months, 4 days	
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		ARNG-(050404-050510)/NA										ADT-(050511-050916)/HD											ARNG-(050917-081119)/GD										USARCG-(081120-090713)/NA
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	19K10/ M1 Armor Crewman
m. GT Score:				NIF
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		AAM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 4 April 2005.  He served in the ARNG until 19 November 2008 when he was transferred to the USARCG.  On 14 July 2009, the applicant was released from the USARCG and assigned to the 824th QM Co.  He was            23 years old at the time and was a high school graduate.  He earned an AAM.  He completed   6 years, 5 months, and 4 days of total service.

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The applicant’s service record shows that on 17 December 2010, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 135-178, by reason of unsatisfactory participation for his inability to attend battle assembles.

2.  The unit commander recommended an under other than honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3.  The unit commander notified the applicant of his rights via certified mail and gave him       30 days to respond.  A signed copy of the applicant's election of rights is not contained in the available record.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 27 August 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge.  

5.  The applicant was discharged from the Unites States Army Reserve on 7 September 2011, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

1.  Memorandums reference the applicant's unexcused absence, dated 22 March 2010,           6 October 2010, 9 November 2010, and 15 December 2010.

2.  One negative counseling statement, dated 17 December 2010, reference the decision to separate the applicant from the Army Reserve Troop Program Unit (TPU).

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214 for a prior period of service (050511-050916) and a copy of his statement of medical examination and duty status, dated (100620) with his application.


POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None were provided by the applicant.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  Army Regulation 135-178 governs procedures covering enlisted personnel management of the Army Reserve.  Chapter 13 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 acrue during a 1 year period and attempts to have the Soldier respond or comply with orders or correspondence have resulted in the Soldier’s refusal to comply with orders or correspondence; or a notice sent by certified mail was refused, unclaimed, or otherwise undeliverable; or verification that the Soldier has failed to notify the command of a change of address and reasonable attempts to contact the Soldier have failed.  Discharge action may be taken when the Soldier cannot be located or is absent in the hands of civil authorities in accordance with the provisions of AR 135-91, paragraph 2-18, and Chapter 3, section IV, of AR 135–178.

2.  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.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  

2.  The record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  By his unsatisfactory participation on scheduled drills and unit assemblies, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting a general, under honorable or an honorable characterization of service.  

3.  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.  

4.  The applicant contends that medical issues contributed to his discharge from the Army.  However, the service record does not support the applicant’s contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition.  Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service with either medical limitation or medication.  
5.  Furthermore, the record does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command and all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.   The character of the applicant’s discharge is commensurate with his overall service record.  

6.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

7.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny relief. 

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review   Date: 17 April 2013 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:  0	No Change:  5
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:		No Change
Change Authority for Separation:	N/A
Change RE Code to:	N/A
Grade Restoration to:	N/A
Other:	N/A








Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130000535



Page 2 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1