1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 28 March 2016 b. Date Received: 31 March 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 honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he was discharged due to a dispute with a higher ranking NCO. At the time, he thought it was in his best interest to leave, because the only other option would surely have been both destructive and humiliating to his family and the Army. At the time, he had two little kids and, if as a father he went to prison, what message would that have given them? He made a really bad judgement call and he has lived with it over the last 15 years. When he was released in 2015, he thought it was finally over. He never imagined that he would receive the type of discharge that he received. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 May 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (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: 30 June 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), dated 28 May 2015, reflects the applicant was charged with violation of the UCMJ, Article 85. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: Charge: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 85, AWOL in desertion (On or about 15 December 1999 to on or about 14 November 2014) (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 8 June 2015 (5) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 18 June 2015 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 January 1999 / 2 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 31 / GED / 122 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-5 / 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist / 13 years, 3 months, 22 days / (Note: The applicant's service record reflects enlisted in the USAR, prior to his entrance on Active Duty. The applicant served 2 years and 26 days in the USAR. This period of service is not reflected in the applicant's DD Form 214, block 12e. The applicant should be credited with 15 years, 4 months and 18 days total service.) d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 29 January 1985 to 24 February 1987 / NIF DEP, 25 February 1987 to 2 April 1987 / NA RA, 3 April 1987 to 24 January 1990 / HD RA, 25 January 1990 to 14 July 1994 / HD RA, 15 July 1994 to 6 January 1999 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea, Germany / Iraq (Note: DD Form 214, does not reflect his combat service. The applicant's evaluation for the period July to September 1991, reflects he was deployed to Iraq.) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, AGCM-3, NDSM, GWOTSM, NCOPDR-2, ASR, OSR-2 / (Note: DA Form 2-1, reflects he was awarded the SWASM-BSS, however, this award is not reflected on his DD Form 214.) g. Performance Ratings: June 1998 thru May 1999, Fully Capable h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge sheet as described in previous paragraph 3c(2). Three Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: from "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "AWOL," effective 15 December 1999 from "AWOL" to "Dropped From Rolls (DFR)," effective 15 January 2000 from "DFR" to "PDY," effective 14 November 2014 i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 5453 days 5447 days (AWOL, 15 December 1999 to 13 November 2014) / apprehended by civil authorities 6 days (civilian confinement, 14 November 2014 to 20 November 2014) j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, with all allied documents listed in block 8 of 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, that 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 that 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 honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents 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 and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this late date. The applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because he was discharged due to a dispute with a higher ranking NCO. At the time, he thought it was in his best interest to leave, because the only other option would surely have been both destructive and humiliating to his family and the Army. However, the issue the applicant submitted is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process. 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 May 2017, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No a. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change e. Restore (Restoration of) Grade to: No Change 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 AR20160007147 4