BOARD DATE: 17 April 2020 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180014786 APPLICANT REQUESTS: The applicant requests upgrade his character of service from 2000-2003, which is characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) to honorable, due to a diagnosis of manic depression (bipolar). APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Personal Statement * Timeline of Events * Orders 205-0913, Department of the Army, Headquarters, United States Army Signal Center, Fort Gordon, GA * Enlisted Record Brief * DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) * Certificate of Psychiatric Evaluation * Eisenhower Medical Center, Personal Data Records (x8) * Chronological Records of Medical Care (x3) * Progress Notes (1 page) * Hepatitis Treatment Guidance * Character References (x4) * Certificate of Achievement * Memorandum of Commendation * Letter of Appreciation * Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) Certificate * Army Achievement Medal (AAM) Certificates and DA Forms 638 (Recommendation for Award) (x3) * Helen Farabee Regional MHMR Center/Crisis Treatment Services (3 pages) FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states he actually served on active duty from 2000 to 2003, however, his DD Form 214 shows his service dates as 1997 to 2003. He was discharged due to drug use and being absent without leave (AWOL). Additionally he states: a. During the time that he served he was affected by a diminished mental state that was diagnosed as manic depressive (bipolar) by an Army psychiatrist at Dwight D. Eisenhower Medical Center, Fort Gordon, in 2003. b. He medicated to alleviate his pain and anxiety. It wasn't until he received mental health treatment that he became mentally stable. c. His mental health condition was not taken into consideration at the time of discharge. As such, he believes he received an unjust character of service. d. He is currently receiving treatment for his mental condition at the VA. e. He completed an honorable period of service from 1986-1989. 3. In a statement he provides he indicates at the time of discharge he was diagnosed with major depressive disorder at Dwight D. Eisenhower Army Medical Center. Additionally, he states: a. For a long time, he had no idea what he was suffering from. He had constant thoughts of suicide, mood swings, and confused state of mind. To escape these feelings, on 11 March 2003, he tried to intentionally overdose on cocaine, assuming this would be the most pleasant way to die. b. He woke up in the hospital at Dwight D. Eisenhower and he was sent to an alcohol and drug treatment program for 30 days and was punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). He was also exiled by everyone in his unit. c. He asked for a transfer to a different unit due to the treatment he was receiving which led to greater depression, but he was denied by the 15th Signal Brigade Chaplain. His wife also stopped talking to him. d. He felt like everything was falling apart, he just wanted to get out and go home, so he used drugs again and checked himself into the mental health facility at Dwight D. Eisenhower where he was admitted for 3 days. He was diagnosed with major depressive disorder and was prescribed Zoloft. On the second day he was admitted he used cocaine again and a positive urinalysis led to his discharge. e. On one occasion he left his barracks room to get something to eat and he was locked [out] upon return. He got a hotel room for about a week. Someone from his unit told his wife that he was no longer in the Army. 4. The applicant served honorably in the Regular Army (RA) from 12 February 1986 through 10 February 1989, he was discharged in pay grade E-4, and he was issued a DD Form 214 for this period of service. 5. It appears he also served honorably from 20 February 1997 through 17 February 2000 [even though an enlistment contract shows the end date of the contract as 16 February 2000]. There is no evidence he had a break in service and he was not issued a DD Form 214 for this period of service. 6. A reenlistment contract shows on 18 February 2000, he reenlisted in the RA for 4 years, in pay grade E-5. He held military occupational specialty (MOS) 56M (Chaplains Assistant). He was assigned to Korea from 23 July 2000 to 22 July 2001. On 18 November 2001, he was assigned to Fort Gordon, with duties in this MOS. 7. On 15 May 2003, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, UCMJ for: a. On or about 1000 hours, on 8 March 2003, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: On Call Duty “UMT” for a funeral (meeting at Good Shepherd Chapel). b. Being AWOL from his unit from 11 to 14 March 2003 and [in jail on 15 March 2003.] c. His punishment consisted of reduction from pay grade E-5 to E-4, a forfeiture of pay, and extra duty. 8. A Certificate of Psychiatric Evaluation, dated 11 June 2003, certifies the applicant was evaluated during his hospitalization from 1 through 11 June 2003. The purpose of this evaluation was explained to him and he agreed to voluntary admission. a. He was admitted for evaluation of suicidal thoughts related to multiple stressors, including his perception of a lack of support from his supervisors and isolation in the unit since he was given an Article 15 for AWOL associated with cocaine use. b. He described more chronic depressive symptoms since October 2002 related to medical problems and inability to contact his daughter. Upon admission, his urine drug screen was positive for cocaine and he admitted to a one time use of cocaine since his enrollment in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP). c. He did not want to continue on active duty. His depressive symptoms had improved and his suicidal thoughts had resolved with inpatient treatment, including medication treatment. This document also shows: a. Diagnoses (DSM IV): (1) Axis I: Major Depressive Disorder, Single Episode, Moderate Cocaine Abuse Cannabis Dependence in Remission. (2) Axis II: Antisocial Personality Traits. (3) Axis llI: Knee Pain, Back Pain, and Headaches. b. Findings: (1) This individual meets the medical retention standards prescribed in AR 40-501, Chapter 3. There is no psychiatric disease or defect on Axis I, above, which warrants disposition by a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). Any Axis I condition noted above was either not unfitting or not of the severity to warrant an MEB. (2) This individual was and is mentally sound and able to appreciate any wrongfulness of his conduct and to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. He has the mental capacity to understand and participate in any administrative proceedings. (3) This Soldier is designated a drug rehabilitation failure based on his use of cocaine after completing the Eisenhower ASAP and while participating in ongoing treatment in the ASAP. (4) The condition and problems presented by this service member are not, in my opinion, amenable to further hospitalization, treatment, disciplinary action, training or reclassification. It is unlikely that efforts to rehabilitate this individual will be successful. c. Recommendations: (1) Precautions: The service member should have no access to weapons for 30 days. (2) Administrative Recommendations: * This Soldier is not in need of further hospitalization. Return to duty to the custody of command is expected * This Soldier is cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his commander to include consideration for administrative separation * This Soldier should be administratively separated in accordance with Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, Chapter 9 as expeditiously as possible d. Treatment Recommendations: (1) Follow up appointment will be provided by Outpatient Behavioral Health Services (OBHS) on 12 June 2003 at 0800 in the Transition Group. (2) Follow-up with ASAP is scheduled for 18 June 2003 at 0800. (3) Continued command support for attendance at a minimum of three 12 Step meetings per week is recommended. e. Information for Commanders: (1) It is important that the service member is followed by OBHS following discharge from the hospital. (2) It is the responsibility of the commander to assure that the Soldier has the opportunity to attend follow up appointments. (3) Should the Soldier continue to demonstrate significant emotional difficulties, the commander is advised to contact OBHS during duty hours or the emergency room after duty hours. 8. The applicant’s urinalysis specimen, collected on 17 June 2003, tested positive for cocaine. 9. On 18 June 2003, he underwent a complete medical evaluation, which shows he indicated that he had experienced several medical situations to include: mouth and throat; he was under psychiatric care; psoriasis; pes planus (moderate); “tested positive for TB in Feb 00; coughs up blood twice a month; shortness of breath when doing most things; wheezes every night from throat with chronic cough since Feb 03; recurrent back pain since Feb 03; numbness in arms and legs when sitting and stooping since Oct 02; knees swell when walking or standing more than 15 minutes since Jul 00; “repillar knee syndrome since Dec 00;” GERD [Gastroesophageal reflux disease]; RPPS [Retropatellar pain syndrome] diagnosis; tested positive for Hepatitis C [for which he was treated]; he stated he was not in good health and he had been diagnosed to suffer from depression; he had several neurological complaints: dizziness, headaches, shaking hands and short term memory loss, several psychiatric complaints for which he was being treated, drug abuse, sleep loss, and he had been in a resident drug program. 9. An Incident Report, dated 14 July 2003, shows the location of the incident as Robinson Avenue, Grovetown, GA. Officers responded to the above location on an alarm activation. Upon arrival officers found that forced entry had been made through a rear door of the residence, officers checked the residence and no one was found. While exiting the residence, officers observed an individual walking along Newmantown Road. The applicant was identified as that individual. He was advised that an outstanding warrant had been issued on him through his agency. At that time he was placed under arrest. On 15 July 2003, he was returned to military control. 10. On 15 July 2003, the applicant's commander advised him of his intent to separate him under Chapter 14, paragraphs 14-12b and c, for a pattern of misconduct and misconduct - commission of a serious offense (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations). The commander's reasons for this action were the two periods of AWOL, a positive urinalysis for cocaine, and failure to repair: assault consummated by a battery and assault upon a person in the execution of law enforcement duties. a. On 17 July 2003, after consulting with counsel, the applicant acknowledged counsel had advised him of the basis for the separation action, the rights available to him, and the effect of waiving those rights. He waived consideration of his case by a separation board. b. The applicant’s intermediate commanders recommended approval of the recommendation. c. On 23 July 2003, the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade and the issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. d. On 25 July 2003, the applicant was discharged accordingly. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 6 years, 4 months, and 15 days of active service. He had lost time from 11-14 March 2003, 8-16 July 2003, and 18-25 July 2003. His DD Form 214 also shows in: * Character of Service, Under Other Than Honorable Conditions * Separation Authority, AR 635-200, Paragraph 14-12c(2) * Narrative Reason for Separation, Misconduct * Authorized Awards: Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award), Army Good Conduct Medal (2nd Award), Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, Air Assault Badge, and Driver and Mechanic Badge with Driver “W” Bar 11. AR 635-200, chapter 14 separates members who demonstrate or display patterns of misconduct, as evidenced by the applicants multiple instances of misconduct. Paragraph 14-12c provides for the separation when there is a pattern of misconduct involving acts of drug abuse. An UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter of the regulation. 12. The applicant provides: a. Timeline of events stating in 2000, he was diagnosed with hepatitis C and he began taking interferon. In October 2002, he experienced side effects, both physically and mentally; he experienced hair thinning, skin rashes, insomnia, mood swings, feelings of being boxed in, suicidal thoughts, hallucinations, and loss of weight. On 11 March 2003, he attempted suicide. He was sent to ASAP, in April 2003, for 30 days. In May 2003, he returned to his unit where he was exiled and shunned. Depression worsened and he felt hopeless and wanted out [of the military]. In June 2003, he used drugs, tested positive, and was diagnosed with major depressive disorder and was treated with Zoloft. In July 2003, he was officially separated from the military. He has been properly diagnosed with bipolar disorder, and is been prescribed Lithium and Risperdal. He is now disabled, he does community service, and works in his church. b. Certificate of Psychiatric Evaluation, dated 11 June 2003, showing he was admitted to the hospital for evaluation of suicidal thoughts related to multiple stressors, including his perception of a lack of support from his supervisors and isolation in the unit after he was given an Article 15 for being AWOL associated with cocaine use. He was diagnosed with major depressive disorder, single episode, moderate cocaine abuse, and cannabis dependence in remission. He also demonstrated antisocial personality traits and knee pain, back pain, and headaches. (1) He was determined to meet medical retention standards prescribed in AR 40-501, Chapter 3. There was no psychiatric disease or defect which warranted disposition through the MEB. (2) He was determined to be mentally sound and able to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct and to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law. He had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings [deemed appropriate by his chain of command]. (3) His condition/problems were not amenable to further hospitalization, treatment, disciplinary action, training or reclassification. It was unlikely that efforts to rehabilitate him would be successful. (4) The recommendation was administrative separation in accordance with AR 635-200, Chapter 9 as expeditiously as possible. c. A document from the internet describing the side effects of interferon therapy (attached). d. Four Character References from: (1) Ms. MM, who states the applicant is a good man, she has known him for more than 40 years. His behavior was overwhelming, he suffered from depression, panicking, crying, and he could not sleep. However, since being treated by the VA, his condition has greatly improved. He is taking his medication, eating, and sleeping, and his outlook on life is very positive. She is happy to have her old friend back. (2) Mr. HLE states he has known the applicant more than 30 years. She met him at their church where he was a faithful member and solid worker. He always carried himself with integrity and trustworthiness. He absolutely loved the U.S Army and was very happy to join and serve his country. During his last enlistment she could see that he was battling some mental health challenges and was trying to cope the best he could. He seemed very depressed and did not know what to do. When he got out of the military and started receiving treatment for his mental issues he returned to his old self and started appreciating life again as he did before he joined the military. She believes he is a model example of a good Soldier and human being that suffered mental health issues and was able to battle back. She often uses him as an example when speaking with other’s who are going through mental health issues. He is a definite success story and the U.S. Army should be proud. (3) Ms. ACB, his previous spouse states she has known the applicant more than 18 years, they were married for over 9 years, and they still remain friends. He has been through his share of life's struggles, but, he never gave up on himself. Some of those were during a time he was having mental health challenges and was not aware of them until he was later diagnosed. She believes if his depression had been medically recognized earlier, many of his decisions may have had different outcomes, especially, his Army career. During their marriage, he always impressed her with his military bearing, enthusiasm, and willingness to help another Soldier. He still strives to set the best example for others. With medical treatment, he is active in his church and local community. He shares his story and words of encouragement to anyone he finds coping with the same challenges he went through. She believes he deserves the chance to be considered and granted an honorable discharge. He is great role model and very dear friend. (4) Ms. LSM states she has known the applicant over 35 years. They grew up together as children and have remained in close contact over the years. He has always been honest and loyal to his family and friends. He lends a helping hand when asked and he is quick to see a need and respond appropriately. During the end of his last enlistment; it was disheartening to see him suffering from mental illness. That light that would glisten from his eyes when he came in contact with his family and friends was diminished to emptiness, and isolation. She observed him trying to cope and handle the situation, the best he knew how, and that was by fading away into a state of depression. He has received the appropriate treatment and now the glisten is back in his eyes. He has gained the confidence to resume his daily activities again and reintegrate himself with family and friends. As mental illness is plagued by stereotypes and stigmas, he has fought against all odds to overcome both. He is one of many Soldiers who face mental illness, but he is the one Soldier that she can say is her hero. e. Three AAM Award Certificates and DA Forms 638 showing he received an: (1) AAM for the period 1 November through 28 February 2002, in Permanent Order 078-1, 369th Signal Battalion, 15th Signal Brigade, Fort Gordon. (2) AAM for the period 9 April through 1 June 2002, in Permanent Order 135-02, 551st Signal Battalion, 15th Signal Brigade, Fort Gordon. (3) AAM for the period 9 July through 30 September 2002, in Permanent Order 248-01, 551st Signal Battalion, 15th Signal Brigade, Fort Gordon. f. ARCOM Certificate, for service from 24 July 2000 to 20 October 2001, for meritorious service while assigned as a chaplain assistant; his professional technical expertise enhanced the morale of Soldiers and contributed to the Battalion “UMTS” success. His dedication to duty reflects distinct credit upon him, 1st Signal Brigade, and the U.S. Army. g. Two Certificates of Achievement showing he was awarded a: (1) Certificate of Achievement, dated 9 May 2017, from the Homeless Program, Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System, in recognition of successfully completing the requirements of HUD/VASH case management and graduation to HUD/VASH Alumni. (2) Certificate of Achievement for supporting the Main Post Chapel Protestant Parish Picnic at Weston Lake on 21 May 2000. h. Memorandum of Commendation, dated 16 June 2000, commending the him for outstanding performance during the period 1 May to 16 June 2000, while serving as Student First Sergeant for Class 00-008, Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Chaplain Center and School, Fort Jackson, SC. He was commended for his military bearing, motivation, teamwork, and above all for being a leader to Advanced Individual Training Soldiers. His outstanding leadership allowed him to gain the respect of his peers, instructors, and drill sergeant(s). His professional attitude inspired future Soldiers to strive to duplicate the example and standards he set. His devotion to duty was a great credit to him, Headquarters Company, U.S. Army Chaplain Center and School, and the U.S. Army. i. Letter of Appreciation from the Command Sergeant Major, 369th Signal Battalion, 15th Signal Brigade, dated 25 February 2002, extending sincere appreciation to the applicant for his devotion to duty, loyalty, and support to the 369th Signal Battalion. His professional attitude and untiring efforts have given strong meaning of the non- commissioned officer creed that we live by from day to day. His contributions to the various missions presented to the Battalion positively affected the reaching of the objective. In reviewing the activities and accomplishments of the battalion since August of 2000, he contributed more than his share to this battalion's achievements. He would welcome the opportunity of serving with him again, anytime, anywhere. j. Progress Notes, printed on 21 November 2017, showing he was recognizes to have various circumstances and conditions. High risk sexual behavior; he lacked housing; unemployment; his cocaine dependence was in remission; pes planus, congenital; and shoulder pain. He also encountered for other specified administrative purposes: hepatitis C; carcinoma of the midline of tongue; type II diabetes mellitus; benign essential hypertension; hyperlipidemia; family history of ischemic heart disease; bipolar disorder; gastroesophageal reflux disease; foot pain; patellofemoral stress syndrome; history of male erectile disorder; congenital pes valgo planus; tobacco use; irritable bowel syndrome; and diabetic peripheral neuropathy associated with type II diabetes mellitus. k. Three documents dated in November 2010, showing he sought services due to crisis circumstances from the Helen Farabee Regional “MHMR” Center. At one point, he was living in his car, which had broken down and he was experiencing some depression. He participated in some treatment planning, was offered a place to stay, and received some counseling. 13. The applicant states that prior to discharge he was affected by a diminished mental state; he was diagnosed as manic depressive (bipolar), in 2003, at Fort Gordon. He self-medicated to alleviate his pain and anxiety and on 11 March 2003, he tried to intentionally overdose on cocaine. He believes he received an unjust character of service, because his mental health condition was not taken into consideration at the time of discharge. He is currently receiving treatment for his mental condition at the VA. a. Boards are to give liberal consideration to veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on mental health conditions, including PTSD. The veteran's testimony alone, oral or written, may establish the existence of a condition or experience, that the condition or experience existed during or was aggravated by military service, and that the condition or experience excuses or mitigates the discharge. b. The Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness provides guidance that Boards are to give liberal consideration to veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on mental health conditions, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), post- traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), sexual harassment and sexual assault. The veteran's testimony alone, oral or written, may establish the existence of a condition or experience, that the condition or experience existed during or was aggravated by military service, and that the condition or experience excuses or mitigates the discharge. 14. The evidence shows he served honorably in the RA from 20 February 1997 through 17 February 2000. He was not issued a DD Form 214 for this period of service and there is no evidence he had a break in service. His DD Form 214 does not correctly reflect this period of service. His DD Form 214 also does not show his AAM 3rd Award. On 18 February 2000, he reenlisted in the RA for 4 years, in pay grade E-5 and served until he was discharged on 25 July 2003, due to drug use and being AWOL. 15. The Army Review Board Agency (ARBA) Medical Advisor reviewed the supporting documents and the applicant’s medical records in the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV) and made the following findings and recommendations: Although the ARBA Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration guidance, the in-service diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) does not mitigate the basis for separation; drug use and AWOL. Furthermore, the applicant’s post-service diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder does not mitigate the basis for separation as it is not service connected. The applicant was enrolled in the Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) in April 2003. He was psychiatrically hospitalized in June 2003 after a cocaine overdose. During his hospitalization, providers diagnosed MDD, Cocaine Abuse, Cannabis Dependence, and Antisocial Personality traits. The applicant reported depressed mood started in October 2002 related to ongoing “medical problems and inability to contact his daughter.” The applicant had been receiving treatment for chronic Hepatitis C and multiple orthopedic injuries. In August 2002, he started infusion treatments; however these resulted in numerous side effects contributing to a sense of hopelessness and depression. The provider determined the applicant met medical retention standards and was mentally sound and responsible for any misconduct; he was cleared for administrative separation. Currently, the applicant receives psychiatric care through the VA with a diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder. He has been successfully managed on medication with no other forms of treatment. Over his 16 years of VA care, providers have not associated Bipolar Disorder with his service, either existing during or aggravated by. 16. In reaching its determination, the Board may consider the applicant’s petition, his submissions, arguments, and his service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicants request, supporting documents, evidence in the records and published DoD guidance for consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant's statement, his record of service, medical records, VA documents, the frequency and nature of his misconduct, the reason for his separation and whether to apply clemency. The Board concurred with the medical advisory opinion finding insufficient evidence of in-service mitigating factors for an upgrade. The Board considered the post-service character reference letters; the applicant did not submit additional evidence on support of post service achievements. The Board found insufficient evidence of mitigating factors to support a clemency determination. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the character of service the applicant received upon separation was not in error or unjust. 2. Prior to closing the case, the Board did note the analyst of record administrative notes below, and recommended the correction is completed to more accurately depict the military service of the applicant. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : X :X :X GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: Except for the corrections addressed in Administrative Note(s) below, the Board found the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): 1. A review of the applicant’s record shows his DD Form 214 for the period ending 25 July 2003 is missing important entries that may affect his eligibility for post-service benefits. As a result, amend his DD Form 214, dated 25 July 2003 by: a. Deleting from item 13, the “Army Achievement Medal 2nd Award” and adding the “Army Achievement Medal 3rd Award.” b. Adding to item 18 (Remarks) the entry “CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 19970220 - 20000217.” REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. AR 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. a. An honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. b. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. c. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed. An UOTHC discharge is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter; however, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier’s overall record. Only a general court-martial convening authority may approve an honorable discharge or delegate approval authority for an honorable discharge under this provision of regulation. Paragraph 14-12c provides for the separation when there is a pattern of misconduct involving acts of drug abuse. 3. On 3 September 2014 the Secretary of Defense directed the Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to carefully consider the revised PTSD criteria, detailed medical considerations and mitigating factors when taking action on applications from former service members administratively discharged UOTHC and who have been diagnosed with PTSD by a competent mental health professional representing a civilian healthcare provider in order to determine if it would be appropriate to upgrade the characterization of the applicant's service. 4. On 25 August 2017 the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued clarifying guidance for the Secretary of Defense Directive to DRBs and BCM/NRs when considering requests by Veterans for modification of their discharges due in whole or in part to: mental health conditions, including PTSD; traumatic brain injury (TBI); sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Standards for review should rightly consider the unique nature of these cases and afford each veteran a reasonable opportunity for relief even if the sexual assault or sexual harassment was unreported, or the mental health condition was not diagnosed until years later. Boards are to give liberal consideration to Veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on those conditions or experiences. The guidance further describes evidence sources and criteria and requires Boards to consider the conditions or experiences presented in evidence as potential mitigation for misconduct that led to the discharge. 5. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records may grant clemency regardless of the court-martial forum. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, Boards shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180014786 12 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180014786 14 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180014786 13