1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 14 September 2016 b. Date Received: 3 October 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, at first he was not AWOL, but was in his room with a migraine headache. Instead of sending someone to check on him, they declared him AWOL. Additionally, they would not place him back on the rolls, resulting in the loss of pay for two months. It was at this point, when he left for a month. When he returned, his unit still would not put him on the rolls. Again, he did not receive a check, which continued for the last three months of his service. The applicant states that a review of Army records will reflect the proof. His medical records should reflect that he suffers from migraine headaches. Further, the date of his last pay check and his discharge date do not match, which proves that his discharge was not handled in accordance with standard operating procedures. In a record review hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 10 July 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 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) / Note: The approved decision by the separation authority reflects that the applicant should have been discharged with a characterization of service of Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. b. Date of Discharge: 13 August 2004 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 27 July 2004, the applicant was charged with: Five specifications of violating Article 86, UCMJ, for: being AWOL from 10 February to 12 March 2003; from 8 May 2003 to 18 January 2004; from 10 March to 7 July 2004; from 16 to 21 July 2004; and, on divers occasions failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty between 18 June 2002 and 18 February 2004. Two specifications of violating Article 91, UCMJ, disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (12 and 13 July 2004). Violation of Article 107, UCMJ, for making a false official statement (25 November 2002). Violation of Article 134, UCMJ, for wrongfully altering a DA Form 4700, by changing the date and writing "24 hours quarters." (2) Legal Consultation Date: 27 July 2004 (3) Basis for Separation: Pursuant to the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial. (4) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (5) Separation Decision Date/Characterization: 13 August 2004 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 25 January 2001 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 31R10, Multichannel Transmission Systems Operator - Maintainer / 5 years, 11 months, 16 days / Note: The applicant's DD Form 214, appears to have errors in blocks 12a and b. The applicant initially enlisted on active duty on 23 July 1998; however, the applicant was discharged during his initial training for entry level performance and conduct. The applicant was not transferred to the Reserve component. On 25 January 2001, the applicant rejoined active duty, therefore, block 12a, should reflect this date. Block 12c, should be adjusted to reflect: 3 years, 6 months, 19 days. d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 23 July 1998 - 16 November 1998 / UNC e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: GWOTSM, NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Charge sheet as described in previous paragraph 3c(1). Eleven Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 10 February 2003; From "AWOL" to "RMC / PDY," effective 12 March 2003; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 8 May 2003; From "AWOL" to "Dropped from Rolls (DFR)," effective 7 June 2003; From "DFR" to "Returned to Military Control," effective 18 January 2004; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 10 March 2004; From "AWOL" to "DFR," effective 9 April 2004; From "DFR" to "PDY," effective 7 July 2004; From "PDY" to "AWOL," effective 16 July 2004; From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 21 July 2004; From "PDY" to "Confined by Military Authority," effective 21 July 2004; Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 417 days (AWOL, 10 February - 11 March 2003; 8 May 2003 - 17 January 2004; 10 March - 6 July 2004) / (AWOL/Military Confinement, 16 July - 1 August 2004) / Surrendered to Military Authorities (11 March 2003, 17 January and 6 July 2004) / Apprehended by Military Authorities (21 July 2004) j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 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 general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable conditions. 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 service record indicates that someone in the discharge process erroneously entered on the applicant's DD Form 214, block 24, character of service as General (Under Honorable Conditions). The discharge packet confirms the separation authority approved the discharge by reason of In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. Soldiers processed for In Lieu of Trial by Court- Martial will be assigned an SPD Code of KFS and an RE Code of 4. 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 separation. The applicant contends that the proper process was not followed in his discharge. Additionally he was not paid for several months. However, 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. Further, in reference to the errors noted in paragraph 4c of these proceedings and his contentions regarding lost monies, the applicant may submit an application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), using the enclosed DD Form 149. A DD Form 149 may also be obtained from a Veterans' Service Organization. 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. 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 record review hearing conducted at Arlington, VA on 10 July 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 b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / RE Code to: No Change f. 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 AR20160018647 1