IN THE CASE OF:

		BOARD DATE: 24 January 2024

		DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230006732


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  his under honorable conditions (general) discharge be 
upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD:

DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code 
(USC), Section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records 
(ABCMR) 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 wants full military benefits. He wants to be buried in a 
military cemetery.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 August 1984 for four years. His 
military occupational specialty was 11C (Indirect Fire Infantryman). 

4.  The applicant served in Hawaii from 6 December 1984 through 8 July 1985.

5.  The applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 of the Uniform 
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 26 February 1985, for without authority failing to go 
at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on or about 22 February 1985. His 
punishment consisted of reduction to private/E-1 (suspended) forfeiture of $144.00 for 
one month, and confinement for seven days.

6.  The applicant received performance counseling on 31 March 1985 for his poor 
attitude and lack of motivation.

7.  The applicant accepted NJP under Article 15 of the UCMJ on 3 May 1985, for being 
derelict in his performance on or about 15 April 1985 and without authority failing to go 
at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on or about 20 April 1985. His 
punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $144.00 pay, restriction, and 
extra duty.

8.  The applicant was counseled on 14 June 1985 regarding pending elimination under 
the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted 
Personnel).

9.  A Certificate of Psychiatric Evaluation, dated 15 May 1985, shows the applicant was 
diagnosed with:

*	polysubstance abuse, primary drugs of choice: cocaine, tetrahydrocannabinol 
(THC), and alcohol (ETOH).; antisocial personality disorder, as manifested by a 
history of substance abuse, truancy, history of police arrests, thefts, at present of 
poor work performance, failure to accept Army regulations, multiple Article 15s, 
absence without leave (AWOL), and polysubstance abuse
*	findings: he met retention standards and there was no psychiatric disease or 
defect which warranted disposition through medical channels
*	recommendation: that he be considered for administrative action as deemed 
appropriate by command

10.  The applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) on 16 May 1985 and present for 
duty on 18 May 1985.

11.  The applicant accepted NJP under Article 15 of the UCMJ on 31 May 1985, for 
AWOL on or about 16 May 1985 until on or about 18 May 1985. His punishment 
consisted of forfeiture of $300.00 for two months (suspended), extra duty, and 
restriction.

12.  The applicant’s immediate commander notified the applicant on 14 June 1985, of 
his intent to initiate action that may result in his separation from the Army under the 
provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted 
Personnel), Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance with a characterization of 
service of under honorable conditions (general). The commander noted the basis for 
this action was the applicant’s unsatisfactory performance as evidenced by his apathy, 
poor attitude, and inability or unwillingness to adapt to the military. 

13.  The applicant consulted with legal counsel on 17 June 1985 and was advised of the 
basis for the contemplated action to separate him. He understood that a general 
discharge under honorable conditions was the characterization of service he might 
receive. He further understood that he might expect to encounter prejudice in civilian life 
if a general discharge was issued to him. He elected to submit statements in his own 
behalf; however, a statement is not available for review.

14.  The applicant accepted NJP under Article 15 of the UCMJ on 19 June 1985, for 
breaking restriction on or about 12 June 1985. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of 
$144.00, extra duty, and restriction.

15.  A Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 25 June 1985, shows the applicant 
had the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, and was 
mentally responsible. 

16.  The applicant's immediate commander formally recommended the applicant’s 
separation on 26 June 1985, under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13, for 
unsatisfactory performance. He noted the applicant had a lack of motivation, poor 
attitude, behavior which had resulted in a disruptive factor in the unit and any attempts 
at rehabilitation would be useless.

17.  The separation authority’s approval memorandum is not available for review.

18.  The applicant was discharged on 9 July 1985. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged under the provisions 
of AR?635-200, Chapter 13, for unsatisfactory performance. He was assigned 
Separation Code JHJ with Reenlistment Code 3, 3C, and 3B. His service was 
characterized as under honorable conditions (general). He completed 10 months and 
17 days of net active service. He lost time from 16 May 1985 to 17 May 1985. His 
awards include the Army Service Ribbon and three marksmanship badges.

19.  Chapter 13, provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when in the 
commander’s judgment the individual will not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention 
will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order, and morale. Service of 
Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be 
characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.

20.  On 5 December 1991 and 20 October 1994, the Army Discharge Review Board 
determined the applicant was properly and equitably discharged and denied his request 
for a change in the character and/or reason of his discharge.

21.  In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition, 
arguments and assertions, and service record in accordance with the published equity, 
injustice, or clemency guidance.

22.  MEDICAL REVIEW:

    a.  Background:  The applicant is requesting that his Under Honorable Conditions 
(General) discharge be upgraded to Honorable due to experiencing “mental health” 
issues during his time in service.  
 
    b.  The specific facts and circumstances of the case can be found in the ABCMR 
Record of Proceedings (ROP). Below is a summary of information pertinent to this 
advisory.   

*	Applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 Aug 1984 with an occupational 
specialty of Indirect Fire Infantryman. Applicant was assigned overseas to Hawaii 
from 06 Dec 1984 - 08 Jul 1985. His awards included the Army Service Ribbon. 
*	On 22 Feb 1985 and 20 Apr 1985, applicant failed to report for duty, and 
received NJP Article 15’s for each infraction. Included with the second Article 15 
was performance “dereliction” (15 Apr 1985). In addition, he received a 
counseling statement (31 Mar 1985) for “poor attitude and lack of motivation.” 
*	Applicant received two more Article 15’s for going AWOL (16-18 May 1985) and 
“breaking restriction” on 19 Jul 1985                           
*	The applicant’s commander (14 June 1985) prepared to initiate action for 
applicant’s separation from the Army for unsatisfactory performance on the basis 
of his “apathy, poor attitude, and inability or unwillingness to adapt to the 
military.”
*	The applicant’s separation packet is available for review. In addition, the 
applicant’s service record includes his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from 
Active Duty), which shows that the Army discharged the applicant “Under  
Honorable Conditions” (General) on 09 Jul 1985.   
 
    c.  The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) Behavioral Health (BH) Advisor 
reviewed this case. Documentation reviewed included the applicant’s completed DD 
Form 149, his ABCMR Record of Proceedings (ROP), Personal Statement, his 
DD Form 214, as well as documents from his service record. The VA electronic medical 
record and DOD health record were reviewed through Joint Longitudinal View (JLV).  
 
    d.  This applicant asserted that mental health issues were mitigating factors in his 
discharge. His service record and supporting documents did include a Certificate of 
Psychiatric Evaluation (05 May 1985). The psychiatrist diagnosed him, “polysubstance 
abuse, primary drugs of choice: cocaine, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and alcohol 
(ETOH).; antisocial personality disorder, as manifested by a history of substance abuse, 
truancy, history of police arrests, thefts, at present of poor work performance, failure to 
accept Army regulations, multiple Article 15s, absence without leave (AWOL), and 
polysubstance abuse.” Based on this documentation in its, there is evidence the 
applicant was diagnosed or treated for non-mitigating conditions that occurred during 
his time in service.  
    
    e.  Per the applicant’s VA EHR, he is service connected at 100% for Bipolar Disorder. 
A Psychiatry ER Note (27 Aug 2007) indicated, “Pt is disorganized, manic, and 
psychotic. Difficult to interview but said that he was afraid that he would hurt someone if 
he didn't come into the hospital. Also indicated that he was suicidal - pointed to his head 
as if he were holding a gun. Said that he had killed people before and had stabbed 
himself four times. Dr…notes indicate that pt has attempted suicide by OD and 
stabbing himself in the abdomen. He was last admitted to 17S 3/19-5/9/07 and 
transferred to 15W. He signed out of 15W the next day saying that he had a 
guaranteed admission to St Albans Dom but actually only had a screening. He 
has been admitted to non-VA hospitals and has had multiple admissions for 
detox, rehab, etc.” A Social Work ER Note (25 Aug 2017) indicated, “’transferred to the 
ER due to reports of increasing depression and SI. The Veteran reported that he has 
been experiencing severe depression over the past 10 to 15 years. He stated 
that the SI has been increasing over the past several months and he would like 
to voluntarily commit to 2E. His SI plans were very vague, 'I can go to a gun 
show, I can OD on my BP meds there are so many ways'. The Veteran stated that 
he is currently homeless and has been living in a transient state moving from 
motel to motel…He denied any recent use of illicit drugs and ETOH stating 
that he has not used any substance in several months.  The Veteran has also not 
been compliant with his medication stating 'why should I it doesn't work'”.  

    f.  In summary, applicant is service connected for “Bipolar Disorder” at 100%. There 
is considerable documentation he has been treated for a bipolar disorder, psychotic 
ideation and substance dependence by VA in which a condition of bipolar disorder had 
been initially experienced during applicant’s time in service. Consequently, after 
reviewing the application and all supporting documents, it is the opinion of this Agency 
Medical Advisor that there is sufficient evidence of a mitigating condition (bipolar 
disorder) that significantly contributed to the specific misconduct of an AWOL episode, 
FTR’s, substandard performance, disobeying orders and poor attitude. Adequate 
documentation was provided in the VA encounter notes (JLV) to support the contention 
that the applicant had experienced bipolar disorder during his time in service.
 
Kurta Questions:

    (1)  Does any evidence state that the applicant had a condition or experience that 
may excuse or mitigate a discharge.  Yes, he experienced a condition of bipolar 
disorder contributing to his AWOL episode, FTR’s, substandard performance, 
disobeying orders and poor attitude while still on active duty that was subsequently 
identified with a 100% service connected disability by VA behavioral health providers  
(JLV notes). 
    (2)  Did the condition exist or experience(s) occur during military service?  Yes, there 
is considerable evidence he initially experienced, or had a worsening of a Bipolar 
condition while on active duty. 
    (3)  Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes, 
it mitigates for his misconduct of an AWOL episode, FTR’s, substandard performance, 
disobeying orders and poor attitude, as bipolar disorder is associated with such 
misconduct.

BOARD DISCUSSION:

1.  After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found 
within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board 
carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support 
of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy 
and regulation, and published Department of Defense guidance for liberal and clemency 
determinations requests for upgrade of his characterization of service.  Upon review of 
the applicant’s petition, available military records and the medical review, the Board 
considered the advising official finding there is sufficient evidence of a mitigating 
condition (bipolar disorder) that significantly contributed to the specific misconduct of an 
AWOL episode, FTR’s, substandard performance, disobeying orders and poor attitude.

2.  The Board determined notwithstanding the advising opine there is insufficient 
evidence of in-service mitigation to overcome the misconduct. The Board found the 
applicant had multiple infractions which included drug addictions and use in addition to 
his AWOL. The Board noted the applicant demonstrated a lack of motivation, poor 
attitude, behavior which had resulted in a disruptive factor in the unit and any attempts 
at rehabilitation would be useless.  The applicant completed 10 months and 17 days of 
net active service. He lost time from 16 May 1985 to 17 May 1985.  Further, the 
applicant provided no post service achievements or character letters of support that 
could attest to his honorable conduct for the Board to weigh a determination. The 
applicant was discharge for unsatisfactory performance and was provided an under 
honorable conditions (General) characterization of service. The Board agreed that the 
applicant's discharge characterization is warranted as he did not meet the standards of 
acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel to receive an 
Honorable discharge. The Board found under liberal consideration his behavior did not 
outweigh the numerous exhibits of misconduct for an upgrade to honorable. Therefore, 
the Board denied relief.

?
BOARD VOTE:

Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

:X	:X	:X	DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.


REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military 
records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This 
provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file 
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the 
interest of justice to do so.

2.  Title 10, USC, Section 1556, provides the Secretary of the Army shall ensure that an 
applicant seeking corrective action by ARBA is provided a copy of all correspondence 
and communications, including summaries of verbal communications, with any agencies 
or persons external to agency or board, or a member of the staff of the agency or 
Board, that directly pertains to or has material effect on the applicant's case, except as 
authorized by statute.

3.  AR 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. 
The version in effect at the time provided that: 

     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 13 provides for separation due to unsatisfactory performance when in the 
commander’s judgment the individual will not become a satisfactory Soldier; retention 
will have an adverse impact on military discipline, good order and morale; the service 
member will be a disruptive influence in the future; the basis for separation will continue 
or recur; and/or the ability of the service member to perform effectively in the future, 
including potential for advancement or leadership, is unlikely. Service of Soldiers 
separated because of unsatisfactory performance under this regulation will be 
characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions.

4.  AR 635-5 (Personnel Separations-Separation Documents) prescribed the separation 
documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active 
military service or control of the Army. The DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's 
most recent period of continuous active service. The general instructions stated all 
available records would be used as a basis for preparation of the DD Form 214. The 
information entered thereon reflects the conditions as they existed at the time of 
separation.

5.  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 Service 
Discharge Review Boards (DRB) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval 
Records (BCM/NR) when considering requests by veterans for modification of their 
discharges due in whole or in part to: mental health conditions, including post-traumatic 
stress disorder; traumatic brain injury; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Boards are 
to give liberal consideration to veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the 
application for relief is based in whole or in part to those conditions or experiences. 

6.  The Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) issued guidance to 
Service DRBs and Service BCM/NRs on 25 July 2018, regarding equity, injustice, or 
clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a 
criminal sentence. BCM/NRs 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)	AR20230006732


1
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1