1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 June 2016 b. Date Received: 5 July 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his chain of command misled him by telling him he needed to leave the base and was later arrested for desertion. The applicant states that he tried to report, but was denied by his chain of command. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at San Antonio, TX on 22 March 2017, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's compelling personal testimony, matters surrounding his discharge (i.e. applicant followed orders to return to Texas after turning himself in, and no confinement after returning to military custody), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of a partial upgrade to the characterization of service to general (under honorable conditions). The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This Board action entails restoration of grade/rank to E-2/PV2. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial / AR 635-200, Chapter 10 / KFS / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 23 May 2002 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date Charges Were Preferred: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record does not contain a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet; however, the applicant's request for discharge indicates he was charged with violation of the UCMJ, Article 85, desertion. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 2 May 2002 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 19 May 2002 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 March 2000 / 3 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 93 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 13E10, Fire Direction Specialist / 1 year, 6 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 254 days (AWOL, 24 May 2001 to 6 February 2002) / apprehended by civilian authorities. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; the applicant listed documents there were attached to the application. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 provides, in pertinent part, a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the Service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Army policy states although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. The applicant's record of service and the issues submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The evidence of record confirms the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge. All requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. The under other than honorable conditions discharge received by the applicant was normal and appropriate under the regulatory guidance. His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of his discharge. The applicant contends that his chain of command misled him by telling him that he needed to leave the base and was later arrested for desertion. 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 applicant further contends that he tried to report, but was denied by his chain of command. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial and credible evidence to support this contention. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced any evidence to support the contention that he was unjustly discharged. The discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. DOCUMENTS / TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING PERSONAL APPEARANCE: In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted no additional documents. b. The applicant presented no additional contentions. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None. 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at San Antonio, TX on 22 March 2017, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's compelling personal testimony, matters surrounding his discharge (i.e. applicant followed orders to return to Texas after turning himself in, and no confinement after returning to military custody), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of a partial upgrade to the characterization of service to general (under honorable conditions). The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This Board action entails restoration of grade/rank to E-2/PV2. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD/RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: E-2/PV2 AUTHENTICATING OFFICIAL: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NCO - Noncommissioned Officer SCM - Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial BH - Behavioral Health HD - Honorable Discharge NOS - Not Otherwise Specified SPD - Separation Program Designator CG - Company Grade Article 15 IADT - Initial Active Duty Training OAD - Ordered to Active Duty TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury CID - Criminal Investigation Division MP - Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge ELS - Entry Level Status MST - Military Sexual Trauma PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions FG - Field Grade Article 15 NA - Not applicable RE - Reentry VA - Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20160012348 1