1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 10 May 2016 b. Date Received: 13 May 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). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that an upgrade of his discharge would allow him the benefit that he so desperately needs and he feels that would put an end to a negative part of his life and allow him to feel proud of the good service he provide to his country. He contends that he takes full responsibility for and regret what happened prior to the night of his misconduct. He contends prior to that night he was a good Soldier. Since that night, the road has been tough but he feels like he has not let the action of that night define him. Evidence of record shows the applicant had a prior records review on 13 November 2015. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, case files, AHLTA and JLV were reviewed. AHLTA contains two BH notes. In May 2006, applicant was seen after overdosing on aspirin. He was admitted to the psychiatric inpatient unit. He reported feeling depressed and reported being under stress because he was pending UCMJ for cursing at an NCO and because his wife had recently asked for a divorce. VA records contain no information regarding applicant. Medical documentation provided by the applicant indicates that he has been diagnosed with serious mental illness-Bipolar I Disorder. He is currently taking multiple medications to control his symptoms to include antidepressant, antianxiety and antipsychotic medications. During his personal appearance, he reported that his problems with Bipolar Disorder began while he was in the Army with symptoms of depression and a suicide attempt which resulted in him being psychiatrically hospitalized. Based on the available information, it is the opinion of the Agency psychiatrist that the applicant's diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder more likely than not contributed to his misconduct. Bipolar Disorder is characterized by diminished executive functioning manifested by increased impulsivity and impaired judgement. As such, there is a nexus between the applicant's Bipolar Disorder and the behaviors that resulted in his Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge from the Army. In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Scott Air Force Base, IL on 2 March 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, a prior period of honorable service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. severe family matters, in-service OBH symptoms and post-service diagnosis of bi-polar type I), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c / JKQ / RE-4 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions b. Date of Discharge: 6 November 2006 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 September 2006 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Wrongfully furnishing alcohol to minors, two females under the age of 16, for which he received a summary court-martial on 31 July 2006; and Committing indecent acts with minors, two females under the age of 16, for which he received a summary court-martial on 31 July 2006. (3) Recommended Characterization: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 July (sic) 2006 (5) Administrative Separation Board: The applicant waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and acknowledged that he would receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge. (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 27 October 2006 / Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 June 2004 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 20 / HS Graduate / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 14T10, Patriot Launching Station Enhanced Operator Maintainer / 4 years, 6 months, 14 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 23 March 2002 to 19 July 2004 / NA RA, 20 July 2004 to 12 June 2006 / HD e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWOTSM, KDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: DA Form 4187, Personnel Action, date 24 August 2006, indicates the applicant's duty status changed from confinement to PDY, effective 24 August 2006. DA Form 4187, Personnel Action, dated 24 July 2006, indicates the applicant's duty status changed from PDY to confinement, effective 24 July 2006. A Charge Sheet, indicates the following four specifications of a charge in violation of Article 134, UCMJ, were preferred on 27 July 2006: Specification 1: committing indecent acts upon a female under 16 years of age on 7 July 2006; Specification 2: committing indecent acts upon a female under 16 years of age on 7 July 2006; Specification 3: furnishing alcohol to minors on 7 July 2006; and Specification 4: furnishing cigarettes to minors on 7 July 2006. Report of Result of Trial and Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial indicates the applicant was found guilty of the aforementioned charge on 31 July 2006, by a summary court- martial. The sentence consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $849, and confinement for 30 days. Summarized Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 28 May 2006, for failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 5 April 2006, and being disrespectful in language towards an NCO on three separate occasions on 5 April 2006. The punishment consisted of 14 days of extra duty and restriction. Negative counseling statements for being processed for separation under chapter 14-12c and being identified as a high risk Soldier. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 31 days (24 July 2006 to 24 August 2006) / Military confinement j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant's Report of Medical History, dated 29 August 2006, indicates mental health issues. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 7 September 2006, indicated no diagnosis and the applicant was cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self-authored letter; and two other letters of support. 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 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. National Defense Authorization Act 2017 provided specific guidance to the Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) in connection with combat or sexual assault or sexual harassment as a basis for discharge review. Further, it provided that Boards will include, as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; as a basis for the discharge. In August 2017, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provided further clarifying guidance to the Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records contain a narrative supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that caused a discharge of lesser characterization. Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 seeks relief contending, that an upgrade of his discharge would allow him the benefit that he so desperately needs and he feels that would put an end to a negative part of his life and allow him to feel proud of the good service he provide to his country. He contends that he takes full responsibility for and regret what happened prior to the night of his misconduct. He contends prior to that night he was a good Soldier. Since that night, the road has been tough but he feels like he has not let the action of that night define him. The applicant's contentions were noted; the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered and the applicant is to be commended on his accomplishments. However, it appears this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to have warrant a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions) at the time of discharge. Further, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill do 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 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. 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 were listed on the hearing data sheet. b. The applicant presented the following additional contention(s): None were listed on the hearing data sheet. c. Witness(es) / Observer(s): None. 10. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a personal appearance hearing conducted at Scott Air Force Base, IL on 2 March 2018, and by a 4-1 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, a prior period of honorable service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. severe family matters, in-service OBH symptoms and post-service diagnosis of bi-polar type I), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to general under honorable conditions. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 11. 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 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 AR20160009406 5