1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 10 August 2017 b. Date Received: 14 August 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, he entered military service at the age of 17, after spending approximately three years in and out-of-home placements secondary to essentially incorrigible behavior, which was later diagnosed as a myriad of mental illnesses including bipolar disorder, intermittent explosive personality disorder, and oppositional/defiant disorder. He states, he failed to disclose his mental health issues at enlistment, in part, because he believed they would prevent his acceptance into the military. As a result, he did not continue his psychotropic medication regime while on active duty, which he believes contributed to poor decision-making including, but not limited to, ongoing alcohol abuse as well as sexual promiscuity. He states, his wife suffered a miscarriage while he was active duty. Given his young age and aggregate inexperience, he did not know to seek emotional support for the loss they experienced. Rather than discuss his pain at the loss of his child with a mental health provider, he opted to numb himself via excessive alcohol intake, which in hindsight was a rather poor decision. He has been diagnosed with PTSD, which is believed to have originated subsequently to abandonment by his father and further worsened by the horror he saw during his time in combat. He was unaware until recently that it was possible to upgrade his military discharge. In today's military, with heightened awareness surrounding mental health and PTSD, he does not believe that he would have been permitted to flounder in what became a state of almost nightly drunkenness, sexual escapades and self-destruction. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, applicant submitted matters and JLV were reviewed. However, due to the basis for separation not being in the applicant's file, a nexus between any medical diagnosis (to include PTSD and behavioral health issues) and the misconduct cannot be determined. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 14 September 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: Court-Martial, Other / AR 635-200, Chapter 3 / JJD / RE-4 / Bad Conduct b. Date of Discharge: 8 January 2007 c. Separation Facts: (1) Pursuant to Special Court-Martial Empowered to Adjudge a Bad-Conduct Discharge: The Special Court-Martial Order Number 20, dated 23 August 2005, is void from the applicant's service record. (2) Adjudged Sentence: Reduction to E-1; to be confined for six months, and to be discharged from the service with a Bad Conduct discharge. (3) Date/Sentence Approved: 4 May 2005 / only so much of the sentence, a reduction E-1, confinement for six months and a bad conduct discharge was approved and, except for that part of the sentence extending to a bad conduct discharge, would be executed. (4) Appellate Reviews: The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of The Army for review by the Court of Military Review. The United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence. (5) Date Sentence of BCD Ordered Executed: 16 November 2006 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 7 March 2002 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / GED / 114 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist / 5 years, 3 months, 3 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Hawaii / NIF f. Awards and Decorations: ASR / The applicant's service record reflects he was awarded the NDSM and the GWTSM, however, these awards are not reflected on his DD Form 214. g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Special Court-Martial Order as described in previous paragraph 3c. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: 149 days (Military Confinement, 4 May 2005 - 30 September 2005) / Released from confinement j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant provided a copy of a Psychosocial Assessment, dated 10 August 2017, which did not reflect a specific diagnosis, but the applicant did have a history of alcohol overdose. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214, DD Form 293 and a Psychosocial Assessment. 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 3, Section IV establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the ADRB to be established facts, issues relating to the applicant's innocence of charges for which he was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the ADRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment. 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 narratives 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 bad conduct discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant's available record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The service record indicates the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and the sentence was approved by the convening authority. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. The Board is empowered to change the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. The applicant contends that he suffers from PTSD. However, the service record contains no evidence of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder diagnosis and the applicant did not submit any evidence to support the contention that the discharge was the result of any medical condition. The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the complete discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official 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. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 14 September 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 AR20170014762 1