1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 26 April 2021 b. Date Received: 26 April 2021 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant’s Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is uncharacterized. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, upgrading to honorable and changing the narrative reason for discharge to disability would allow the applicant to receive the Post-9/11 GI Bill and compensation benefits. The applicant being diagnosed with Bipolar disorder prior to entering service, was exacerbated by the military service. Documents from VA indicate an upgrade to honorable and the applicant had a disability. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 19 October 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board’s decision. (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 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 04 October 2007 c. Separation Facts: The applicant’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) is void of the case separation file. However, the applicant provided documents which are described in 3c(1), (2), (3) and (4) below. (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 21 September 2007 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Memorandum for the Commander, rendered by a Psychiatrist of Behavioral Medicine Division, reflects the applicant, examined on 19 September 2007, was recommended for separation under Chapter 5-17 for having a serious personality disorder which would interfere with the ability to perform the military duties. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF / The intermediate commander recommended Uncharacterized. (4) Legal Consultation Date: Undated (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 4 October 2007 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 24 April 2007 / 3 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / 95 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / None / 5 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant’s Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), 24 July 2007, reflects the applicant had no flagging action. There were no entries for reenlistment eligibility and the Assignment Eligibility Availability. The applicant’s AMHRR is void of the case separation file. However, the applicant provided documents which are described in previous paragraph 3c and below: Report of Mental Status Evaluation (MSE), 19 September 2007, reflects the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand and participate in administrative proceedings and was mentally responsible. The applicant was evaluated pursuant to AR 635-200, paragraph 5-13, for a disorder manifesting disturbances of distorted thought patterns, emotional control, and maladaptive behavior sufficiently severe that the Soldier’s ability to perform military duties is severely impaired. Command was advised the condition would interfere with fitness for duty to include military training and combat, and the condition existing prior to service, does not amount to a disability. The disorder will clearly impact reliability, stability, and judgement. Command should anticipate increased problems with behavioral issues, thought disorders, mood control, confusion, paranoia, and narcissistic attitude in response to perceived stressful situations. Individuals with the disorder often cannot make decisions effectively, and exhibited behavioral problems are considered a constant risk concern to themselves and would be a risk concern for others through carelessness brought on by their symptoms. These individuals have a relatively unstable and lifelong disorder which shows minimal changes to psychotherapy and medication treatments. The recommendation was to expeditiously discharge the applicant under AR 635-200, Chapter 5-17. The applicant did not meet the criteria for separation through medical channels according to AR 40-501. The AXIS I diagnosis was deferred, and AXIS II diagnosis was Antisocial Personality Disorder. Report of Mental Status Evaluation (MSE), 20 September 2007, reflects the applicant being admitted to psychiatry for odd and disruptive behavior, had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings, was mentally responsible, and met the retention requirements of Chapter 3, AR 40-501. The evaluation found a history of court ordered mental health treatment, delusional thinking, impulsivity, depression, drug abuse, criminal behavior, anger problems, and difficulty adapting to new situations. If retained in the military, the command can anticipate problems with disruption of sensitive missions, insubordination, depression, anxiety, reliability, and increased risk of accidents, and heavy utilization of medical resources as the trainee will require numerous resources. The applicant would likely be a liability in combat situations. It was the examiner’s clinical opinion the trainee will not respond to psychiatric care available in the military or command attempts at rehabilitation in a timely manner. The diagnoses were: Bipolar disorder type I – currently manic with delusions of grandeur; Schizoaffective disorder by history; and history of marijuana and benzodiazepine dependence. The recommendation was to expedite an administrative separation under Chapter 5-17; removal from training and no use of weapons; and the applicant should remain on unit watch until cleared by BMD, command should control and dispense all medications, and have regular safety checks until separated. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: Two MSEs as described in previous paragraph 4h. (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Two DD Forms 293; recommendation memorandum (Battalion Commander); DD Form 214; VA certifying letter; VA letter (summary of benefits); VA Rating Decision (Denied); Reasons for Decision excerpt (page 2 of 4); VA letter (Proof of Service Card); and Verification of Military Experience and Training (VMET). 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides 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), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides 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, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities’ last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification 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. (2) 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. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board) sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember’s date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier’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. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) Paragraph 3-9 states a separation will be described as entry-level with service uncharacterized if processing is initiated while a Soldier is in entry-level status. (5) Chapter 5 provides for the basic separation of enlisted personnel for the convenience of the government. (6) Paragraph 5-1 states 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 paragraph 5-14 (previously paragraph 5-17) unless properly notified of the specific factors in the service that warrant such characterization. (7) Paragraph 5-14 (previously 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. (8) Glossary defines entry-level status for RA Soldiers is the first 180 days of continuous AD or the first 180 days of continuous AD following a break of more than 92 days of active military service. e. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of “JFV” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-14 (previously Chapter 5-17), Condition, Not a Disability. f. Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers’ Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1 defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waiverable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant’s Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant’s AMHRR includes evidence the applicant, while in training status, was evaluated by competent medical authority and determined the applicant with diagnoses of Bipolar disorder type I of manic had delusions of grandeur and history of marijuana and benzodiazepine dependence. It was determined the disorder manifesting disturbances of distorted thought patterns, emotional control, and maladaptive behavior were sufficiently severe, the ability to perform military duties was severely impaired, and the condition would interfere with fitness for duty to include military training and combat. The condition existing prior to service, did not amount to a disability, and the disorder will clearly impact reliability, stability, and judgment, which would prevent the applicant from completing training. The applicant’s Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR) is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. The applicant’s AMHRR does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant’s signature. The applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, by reason of Condition, Not a Disability, with an uncharacterized characterization of service. The applicant’s AMHRR reflects the applicant, in an entry level status, had a total of 164 days of continuous active duty service at discharge. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions, at the time, of Chapter 5, paragraph 5-17, AR 635-200 with an uncharacterized discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is “Condition, Not a Disability,” and the separation code is “JFV.” Army Regulation 635-8 (Separation Processing and Documents), governs preparation of the DD Form 214, and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes). The regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant contends upgrading to honorable and changing the narrative reason for discharge to disability would allow the applicant to receive the Post-9/11 GI Bill and compensation benefits. Eligibility for veterans’ 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 applicant contends being diagnosed with Bipolar disorder prior to entering service but it was exacerbated by the military service. The applicant provided mental health evaluations, 19 and 20 September 2007, reflecting the applicant was diagnosed with Bipolar disorder type I – currently manic with delusions of grandeur; Schizoaffective disorder by history; history of marijuana and benzodiazepine dependence; and Anti-social personality disorder. The applicant’s AMHRR contains no documentation of any behavioral health diagnosis. The applicant contends the VA documents show the applicant’s service was honorable. The applicant provided a VA letter, 26 November 2014, which reflects the VA determined the period of service from 24 April 2007 to 4 October 2007, as honorable. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former servicemember is eligible for benefits are different than used by the Army when determining a member’s discharge. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed the applicant's DOD and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found that the applicant has the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses/experiences: Adjustment Disorder, Bipolar I Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Antisocial Personality Disorder. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder, Bipolar I Disorder, and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. The VA has service connected the applicant for Bipolar Disorder. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder, Bipolar I Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Antisocial Personality Disorder. There is some discrepancy in the record as to whether the applicant’s Chapter 5-17 separation for a Condition, Not a Disability was for the personality disorder or Bipolar Disorder given that two different BH providers completed Mental Status Evaluations. But in both evaluations, administrative separation was recommended, and the applicant was psychiatrically cleared for administrative action. Therefore, applicant’s Uncharacterized discharge for a Condition, Not a Disability is appropriate. The applicant’s service connection by the VA for Bipolar Disorder does not negate the appropriateness of the discharge given that the VA operates under a different set of laws and regulations. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After applying liberal consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant’s Adjustment Disorder, Bipolar I Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder outweighed the applicant’s Condition, Not a Disability basis for separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends being diagnosed with Bipolar disorder prior to entering service but it was exacerbated by the military service. The Board liberally considered this contention but found no evidence in the applicant’s AMHRR or applicant-provided evidence to support the applicant’s contention. Therefore, a discharge upgrade is not warranted. (2) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The Board considered this contention but, due to an absence of mitigating factors, determined that the Condition, Not a Disability discharge was proper and equitable. (3) The applicant contends upgrading to honorable and changing the narrative reason for discharge to disability would allow the applicant to receive the Post-9/11 GI Bill and compensation benefits. The Board considered this contention and determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do 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. (4) The applicant contends the VA documents show the applicant’s service was honorable. The criteria used by the VA in determining whether a former servicemember is eligible for benefits are different than that used by the Army when determining a member’s discharge characterization. After liberally considering all the evidence, including the VA determination, the Board found that the applicant had an unmitigated basis for separation. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, in light of the current evidence of record. The applicant has exhausted their appeal options available with ADRB. However, the applicant may still apply to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. The applicant is responsible for satisfying the burden of proof and providing documents or other evidence sufficient to support the applicant’s contention(s) that the discharge was improper or inequitable. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s characterization of service because there were no mitigating factors for the Board to consider. Since the applicant was discharged for failing medical procurement standards due to Bipolar Disorder existing prior to military service, Uncharacterized is proper and equitable. 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. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant’s reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code under the same pretexts, and the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL – Absent Without Leave AMHRR – Army Military Human Resource Record BCD – Bad Conduct Discharge BH – Behavioral Health CG – Company Grade Article 15 CID – Criminal Investigation Division ELS – Entry Level Status FG – Field Grade Article 15 GD – General Discharge HS – High School HD – Honorable Discharge IADT – Initial Active Duty Training MP – Military Police MST – Military Sexual Trauma N/A – Not applicable NCO – Noncommissioned Officer NIF – Not in File NOS – Not Otherwise Specified OAD – Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) – Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF – Official Military Personnel File PTSD – Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE – Re-entry SCM – Summary Court Martial SPCM – Special Court Martial SPD – Separation Program Designator TBI – Traumatic Brain Injury UNC – Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC – Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA – Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210001513 1