1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 17 May 2017 b. Date Received: 22 May 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, believes an upgrade is deserves. The applicant was a good Soldier and never was in trouble. The applicant was released due to an injury and would still be in the Army if it were up to the applicant. The applicant is a full-time nursing student with a wife and four children, who is trying to be the best person possible. The applicant states an upgrade would be a blessing as it would open many doors in order to support the family. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of an Adjustment Disorder and Bipolar Disorder. Post service, the applicant does not have a service connected disability rating and has not been seen by the Veteran Affairs. In summary, the applicant failed to medical procurement standards for Bipolar Disorder which he did not report at the time of enlistment, and therefore was appropriately discharged with a Condition, Not a Disability due to the pre- existing diagnosis. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 26 October 2018, 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: Condition, Not a Disability / AR 635- 200, Chapter 5-17 / JFV / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 3 April 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 7 March 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: He was diagnosed with Axis I: Bipolar Disorder on 15 February 2012, by a qualified mental health professional at the Fort Gordon Community Behavioral Health Services. He failed to go to his appointed place of duty on 8 January and 1, 3, 4, 5 and 7 February 2012; He left his appointed place of duty on 10 January 2012; He was absent without authorized leave from 4 to 7 January 2012; He violated several lawful written orders from COL L, by wrongfully leaving the Company area without properly signing out on 6 February 2012, using tobacco products as a Phase IV Soldier on 10 February 2012 and 7 December 2011, consuming alcohol products as a Phase IV Soldier on 21 January 2012, using civilian linen on his bed as a Phase IV Soldier on 18 January 2012, leaving his wall locker unsecured on 10 January 2012; and, He violated Echo Company policy by wrongfully possessing food items in his room on 18 January 2012. This condition severely affected his ability to effectively perform his duties in a military environment. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 8 March 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 26 March 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 November 2011 / 18 weeks (IADT) b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 98 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / None / 1 year, 5 months, 27 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: ARNG, 21 March 2008 - 28 April 2009 / UNC (Break in Service) ARNG, 1 November 2011 - 4 April 2012 / UNC (Concurrent Service) e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Personnel Action form, reflects the applicant's duty status changed from "Present for Duty (PDY)" to "Absent Without Leave (AWOL)," effective 4 January 2012. CG Article 15, dated 31 January 2012, for absenting himself from his unit between 4 and 7 January 2012; failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (x2) (8 January 2012); and, failing to obey a lawful order (x4) (15 August and 12 September 2011). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2; forfeiture of $389 pay (suspended); extra duty and restriction for 14 days; and, an oral reprimand. Record of Supplementary Action under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 10 February 2012, reflects the suspended portion of the punishment, imposed on 31 January 2012, was vacated because the applicant failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty on 1 February 2012. Report of Medical Examination, dated 17 February 2012, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Bipolar Disorder (Axis I). CG Article 15, dated 24 February 2012, for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty (x4) (3, 4, 5 and 7 February 2012); and, failing to obey a lawful order (x2) (15 August 2011). The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1 (suspended); forfeiture of $347 pay (suspended); extra duty and restriction for 14 days; and, an oral reprimand. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 3 days (AWOL, 4 January 2012 - 6 January 2012) / NIF j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Medical Examination, dated 17 February 2012, the examining medical physician noted in the comments section: Bipolar Disorder (Axis I). 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he is a full-time nursing student. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 5-17 specifically provides that a Soldier may be separated for other physical or mental conditions not amounting to a disability, which interferes with assignment to or performance of duty and requires that the diagnosis be so severe that the Soldier's ability to function in the military environment is significantly impaired. AR 635-200, paragraph 5-1, states that a Soldier being separated under this paragraph will be awarded a characterization of service of honorable, general (under honorable conditions), or an uncharacterized description of service if in entry-level status. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge is normally inappropriate for individuals separated under the provisions of Chapter 5-17 unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service that warrant such characterization. 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." "Conditions documented in the 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 PTSD or PTSD related conditions 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 under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Correction boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a characterization of service other than honorable conditions. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD or PTSD-related conditions as a causative factor 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. Correction Boards will also exercise caution 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 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 evidence of record shows the applicant, while in training status, was evaluated by competent medical authority and determined to have a Bipolar Disorder. The applicant claims the he was discharged due to an injury and he was never in any trouble. However, the service record indicates the applicant committed many discrediting offenses, which constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicant's numerous incidents of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and were prejudicial to good order and discipline. Further, 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 applicant contends that he had good service. 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. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does 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 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 26 October 2018, 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 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 AR20170008932 1