1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 5 February 2015 b. Date Received: 1 August 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, his discharge was improper due to his behavioral health issues resulting from service. Specifically, his bipolar disorder during his service. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time to include the military electronic medical record, the applicant did not have a medical or behavioral health condition that was mitigating for the offenses which led to his separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 4 October 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: Pattern of Misconduct / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12b / JKA / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 23 December 2009 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 29 November 2009 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: in that he had established a pattern of misconduct during his tenure in the Army. On 11 December 2008, he first received punishment under Article 15 for failing to report to his appointed place of duty on multiple occasions, disrespecting a noncommissioned officer, and routinely failing to obey orders. Immediately following the article proceeding, he left his duty station and returned home for the holidays, he was absent without leave for approximately 18 days and after returning to his duty station, he vandalized multiple vehicles belonging to host country nationals, and He was given yet another chance to rehabilitate and deploy to Iraq in August 2009. Shortly after his arrival in Iraq, he began sexually harassing female Soldiers, disobeying orders, failing to go to his appointed place of duty, and disrespecting noncommissioned officers. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 3 November 2009, the applicant waived his rights to consult with a JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 1 December 2009 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 13 June 2007 / 4 years, 20 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 100 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 42A10, Human Resources / 2 years, 6 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Germany, SWA / Iraq (22 July 2009 - 3 December 2009) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: CG Article 15, dated 11 December 2008, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (1 and 3 October 2008); go without authority from his place of duty (30 September 2008); disrespectful language towards an noncommissioned officer (30 September 2008); derelict in the performance of his duties (30 September 2008); and, failed to obey a lawful order (30 September 2008). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $352 pay; and, extra duty and restriction for 14 days. Two Personnel Action forms, reflect the applicant's duty status changed as follows: From "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 12 December 2008; and, From "AWOL" to "PDY," effective 5 January 2009. CG Article 15, dated 2 April 2009, for willfully and wrongfully damaging a Volkswagen Golf, a Fiat Punto and Piaggio scooter in the amount of €150 each (19 January 2009). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $699 pay per month for two months (one month suspended); and, extra duty for 45 days. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 23 November 2009, reflects the applicant was cleared for administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. FG Article 15, dated 28 November 2009, for going without authority from his place of duty (26 October 2009); failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (5, 19 and 23 October 2009); failed to obey a lawful order (16 and 25 October 2009); derelict in the performance of his duties (between 3 and 5 October and on 15 September 2009); disorderly conduct (22 October 2009); engaged in sexual contact without the permission of SPC G (27 October 2009) and AFC R (between 15 and 22 October 2009); and for inducing a reasonable fear of bodily harm to SPC M (between 12 October and 2 November 2009). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $699 pay per month for two months (suspended); extra duty for 30 days (suspended); restriction for 30 days; and, an oral reprimand. Numerous Developmental Counseling Forms, for various acts of misconduct. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214 and 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 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 14-12b addresses a pattern of misconduct consisting of either discreditable involvement with civilian or military authorities or discreditable conduct and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline including conduct violating the accepted standards of personal conduct found in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulations, the civilian law and time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. Secretary of Defense Memorandum for Secretaries of the Military Departments (Subject: Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, dated September 3, 2014), provided guidance to help ensure consistency across the military services in consideration of PTSD relevant to Service Members' discharges. "Liberal consideration will be given in petitions for changes in characterization of service to service treatment record entries which document one of more symptoms which meet the diagnostic criteria of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) or related conditions. Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations which document PTSD or PTSD-related conditions connected to military services. In cases where Service Records or any document from the period of service substantiated the existence of one or more symptoms of what is now recognized as PTSD or PTSD-related condition during the time of service, liberal consideration will be given to finding that PTSD existed at the time of service. Liberal consideration will also be given in cases where civilian providers confer diagnoses of PTSD or PTSD-related conditions, when case records contain narratives that support symptomatology at the time of service, or when any other evidence which may reasonably indicate that PTSD or a PTSD-related disorder existed at the time of discharge which might have mitigated the misconduct that caused the under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. This guidance in not applicable to cases involving pre- existing conditions which are determined not to have been incurred or aggravated while in military service." 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that 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 contends that he was suffering from a Bipolar Disorder, which affected his behavior and led to his discharge. However, the service record contains no evidence of a Bipolar Disorder diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record shows that on 23 November 2009, the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation which indicates he was mentally responsible, with thought content as clear, and was able to recognize right from wrong. It appears, the applicant's chain of command determined that he knew the difference between what was right and wrong as indicated by the mental status evaluation. 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 4 October 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 new Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. SPD/RE Code Change to: No Change f. Restoration to Grade: 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 AR20160014054 1