1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 18 September 2018 b. Date Received: 15 October 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, the current discharge prevents the applicant from obtaining good employment. The discharge embarrasses the applicant because the applicant was a great Soldier. The applicant served the country and a year in Afghanistan with honor. At the time, the mother was diagnosed with stage-4 cancer. The request for compassionate reassignment to be near the mother was denied. The applicant regretfully went AWOL without thinking straight. It has been seven years since discharge. The applicant adds that the mother's death certificate is all the applicant has as evidence (note that the certificate was not attached to the application). In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 21 February 2020, and by a 3-2 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 August 2011 c. Separation Facts: (1) DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet): On 29 July 2011, the applicant was charged with the following: Charge: Violation of Article 86, UCMJ, for being AWOL on 3 June 2011, and remaining absent until 15 July 2011. (2) Legal Consultation Date: 29 July 2011 (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: 19 August 2011 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 September 20008 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 26 / HS Graduate / NIF c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 92R1P, Parachute Rigger / 2 years, 9 months, 25 days (includes 31 days of excess leave from 29 July 2011 to 30 August 2011, credible for all purposes, except pay and allowances) d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (19 November 2009 to 7 November 2010) f. Awards and Decorations: AAM; NDSM; ACM-2CS; GWOTSM; ASR; OSR-2; NATO MDL g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Return of Absentee, dated 15 July 2011, indicates the applicant was apprehended by civil authorities and returned to military control on 15 July 2011. Charge Sheet described at the preceding paragraph 3c(1) with its associated documents. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 42 days (AWOL on 3 June 2011 to 14 July 2011) / The applicant was apprehended by civil authorities. j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 18 September 2018. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided 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. Further, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record during the current enlistment. (See chap 3, section II.) However, for Soldiers who have completed entry-level status, characterization of service as honorable is not authorized unless the Soldier's record is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization clearly would be improper, and when characterization of service under other than honorable conditions is not warranted for a Soldier in entry-level status, service will be uncharacterized. AR 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "KFS" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, "In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial." The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "KFS" will be assigned an RE Code of 4. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to honorable. The applicant's available 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 no other acts of significant achievement or valor, and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general (under honorable conditions) discharge by the separation authority at the time of discharge. 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, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends he is requesting an upgrade of his discharge because of mitigating circumstances which contributed to his misconduct. Specifically, he claims family issues involving his mother being diagnosed with stage-4 cancer at home resulted in his discharge. While the applicant may believe his stress at home was the underlying cause of his misconduct, the record of evidence does not demonstrate that he sought relief from stress through his command or the numerous Army community services like the Chaplain, Army Community and Family Support Services, Community Counseling Center, and other medical resources available to all Soldiers. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the incidents of misconduct, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. 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 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 21 February 2020, and by a 3-2 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 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 AR20180014650 1