1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 March 2017 b. Date Received: 20 March 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, would like to be able to obtain better employment and seek education opportunities that require an honorable discharge. The applicant was discharged from the Army due to a family emergency; the wife abandoned the applicant and a child. The applicant was unable to obtain child care and was left without transportation. The applicant notified the chain of command and they refused to authorize leave for this situation. The applicant had no choice but to be counted as AWOL due to the circumstances that were beyond control. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of ADHD and Dysthymic Disorder. In summary, the applicant did not have a BH diagnosis that was mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a travel panel hearing conducted at San Antonio, TX on 6 November 2018, 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: 5 January 2011 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date Charges Were Preferred: 24 November 2010 (2) Basis for Separation: The evidence of record contains a DD Form 458, Charge Sheet which shows on 24 November 2010, the applicant was charged without authority, absented himself from his unit (7 April 2010 until 21 October 2010). (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 9 December 2010, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 December 2010 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 1 November 2008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 years / GED Certificate / 87 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91D10, Power Generation Equipment Repairer / 3 years, 7 months, 20 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: RA, 19 October 2006 to 31 October 2008 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq, 5 November 2007 to 18 January 2009 f. Awards and Decorations: ARCOM, AAM, NDSM, ICM-2CS, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Military Police Report, dated 4 November 2010, relates the applicant was under investigation for desertion, apprehended by civilian authorities, on post. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: AWOL x3 for 204 days; 7 April 2010 until 6 May 2010, for 30 days, mode of return unknown; 7 May 2007 until 20 October 2010, for 164 days, apprehended and 21 October 2010 until 3 November 2010, for 13 days, surrendered. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (two pages). 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 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 the characterization of service from under other than honorable conditions to 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. The applicant, in consultation with legal counsel voluntarily requested, in writing, a discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense, and he indicated he understood he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veterans' benefits. 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 several acts of significant achievement and valor to include combat service; however, it did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of separation. The applicant seeks relief contending, he would like to be able to obtain better employment and seek education opportunities that require an honorable discharge. The Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. The applicant further contends, he was discharged from the Army was due to a family emergency, his wife abandoned him and his child. The record of evidence shows that the applicant was discharged without authority, absenting himself from his unit on three occasions for varying periods of time. The applicant also contends, he was unable to obtain child care and was left without transportation; and he notified his chain of command and they refused to authorize leave for his situation. 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 notified his chain of command and they refused to authorize him leave. 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 additionally contends, he had no choice but to be counted as AWOL due to the circumstances that were beyond his control. He had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief and there is no evidence in the record that he ever sought such assistance before committing the misconduct which led to the separation action under review. 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 the additional document(s) and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing. a. The applicant submitted the following additional document(s): None b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a travel panel hearing conducted at San Antonio, TX on 6 November 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 11. 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 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 AR20170005195 3