1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 15 May 2017 b. Date Received: 18 May 2017 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant through legal counsel request an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to his narrative reason for discharge. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that his discharge was objectively improper per 32 C.F.R 70.9(b) because an error of both fact and procedure existed at the time of his discharge as noted in the submitted brief. The applicant requests that the Board consider whether at the time of discharge he was entitled to a physical evaluation board and separation or retirement benefits in accordance with Army Regulation 635- 40. The applicant contends he served in the Army from 27 September 2010 to 29 March 2012. During this time the Army diagnosed him with adjustment disorder and separated him with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge as a punitive measure for attempting suicide. Immediately after he was separated from the military he sought help from the Department of Veterans Affairs who diagnosed him with service related PTSD. He was initially rated 50 percent disabled, and his rating increased to 70 percent in December 2014. The applicant contends given the VA's diagnosis of PTSD and the unremitting pain he still suffers, the Army's diagnosis of adjustment disorder and malingering was improper. The applicant believes if the Army had properly diagnosed him with PTSD, or followed it own discharge regulation for adjustment disorder diagnoses, it likely would have granted him an honorable discharge. Given the impropriety of the Army's general discharge, the applicant humbly requests the Board to retroactively award him an honorable discharge. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review in the service record, AHLTA, and JLV, the applicant was diagnosed with the behavioral health conditions of Acute Stress Reaction, Adjustment Disorder with anxiety and depression, Major Depression, Malingering and PTSD. However, due to the nature of the behavioral health conditions, they do not mitigate the offense as the malingering was likely not due to PTSD and was more consistent with the existence of an underlying maladaptive personality organization. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 19 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 30 March 2012 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 8 March 2012 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason: being found guilty of malingering on 1 March 2012 (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 8 March 2012 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 15 March 2012 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 27 September 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 94 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 25U1P, SIG SUPT SYS SPEC / 1 year, 6 months, 4 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (16 July 2011 to 4 December 2011) f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ICM-CS, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: AR 15-6 Investigation in the Alleged Suicide Ideation, Gesture or Attempt by the applicant. The investigating officer was appointed to investigate the facts and circumstances surrounding the alleged suicide ideation, gesture, and attempt by the applicant. As a result of his investigation the investigating office recommended the applicant continue to receive behavioral health treatment. If his deployment was scheduled to extend beyond his behavioral health counselors he should be redeployed to Fort Bragg, NC. At no time was he to be denied access to behavioral health counselors. He should have remained on unit watch for the duration of his deployment. In order to maintain a normal physical appearance his weapon should have been rendered ineffective, by removing the bolt, and returned to him. His chain of command was recommended to consider pursuing UCMJ action under 115 for Malingering and consider initiating separation from the Army for a pattern of misconduct. If USMJ act was chosen to be inappropriate, the applicant's chain of command was recommended to initiate separation from the Army through a Chapter 5-17 separation for non-clinical adjustment disorder. FG Article 15, dated 1 March 2012, while near Camp Taji, Iraq, avoided his duties as a signal information service specialist by intentionally injuring himself by taking 2-3 Motrin pills and inserting a basketball inflating needle into his arm in an attempt to bleed himself to death on 21 October 2011. The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $500 pay per month for two months; and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. Several American Red Cross Messages whereas the applicant makes reference to being physically and mentally in pain. Several negative counseling for various acts of misconduct and performance to include DA Form 4187's (Personnel Action) for promotion. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Memorandum, dated 26 October 2011, reference Behavioral Health Status Update for the applicant. Memorandum dated 28 October 2011 for M.L.N. MA a Licensed Professional Counselor, which makes reference to a psychological evaluation on the applicant had been performed by her on 4 October 2011. She indicated that the applicant met the criteria for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Panic Disorder without Agoraphobia, and Anxiety Disorder not otherwise specified. It was noted that the applicant attempted suicide and continued to harbor thoughts of suicide on a daily basis. It was apparent that the applicant was experiencing multiple and significant mental health issues which render him incapable of continuing military service. She had no reason to believe that the applicant was fabricating any of the symptoms described in his evaluation. Memorandum, dated 1 November 2011, reference the "Command Directed Mental Health Evaluation in the case of the applicant. The applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I 309.0 for adjustment disorder with depressed mood and V65.2 malingering; Axis II deferred; Axis III reported history of leg injury; Axis IV occupational problems, illness of mother; and Axis V 60 (current). It was noted while the applicant technically met medical fitness standard prescribed in AR 40-501, it was the opinion of the provider that the applicant's behavior was not amenable to treatment, disciplinary action, training, or reclassification. It was highly likely that any efforts at rehabilitation for his would e unsuccessful. The applicant's behavior should be managed administratively through a Chapter 5-17 separation by his command. However, the command should first consider whether or not to punish the applicant's behaviors under UCMJ Article 115 for malingering. Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 24 February 2012, showing the applicant suffered with issues with adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, malingering, depression, and several other issues. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 March 2012, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for adjustment disorder & malingering. There was no evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through military medical channels. The applicant was mental responsible, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate intelligently as a respondent in any administrative proceedings. The applicant was psychologically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; legal brief; and exhibits 1-31. 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 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted. Paragraph 14-12c states a Soldier is subject to action per this section for commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, misconduct (serious offense). The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JKQ" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. 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 through legal counsel request an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a change to his narrative reason for discharge. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that she should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635- 200 with a general (under honorable conditions discharge). The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the separation code is "JKQ." Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that 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 further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. The applicant through legal counsel seek relief contending that during his period of service the Army diagnosed him with adjustment disorder and separated him with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge as a punitive measure for attempting suicide. Immediately after he was separated from the military he sought help from the Department of Veterans Affairs who diagnosed him with service related PTSD. He was initially rated 50 percent disabled, and his rating increased to 70 percent in December 2014. The applicant contends given the VA's diagnosis of PTSD and the unremitting pain he still suffers, the Army's diagnosis of adjustment disorder and malingering was improper. The applicant believes if the Army had properly diagnosed him with PTSD, or followed its own discharge regulation for adjustment disorder diagnoses, it likely would have granted him an honorable discharge. Given the impropriety of the Army's general discharge, the applicant humbly requests the Board to retroactively award him an honorable discharge. The applicant's contends were noted; evidence in the record shows separation action was initiated against the applicant for malingering on 1 March 2012 after receiving an Article 15 for avoiding his duties as a signal information service specialist by intentionally injuring himself in Iraq by taking 2-3 Motrin pills and inserting a basketball inflating needle into his arm in an attempt to bleed himself to death on 21 October 2011. A memorandum dated 28 October 2011,which makes reference to a psychological evaluation on the applicant had been performed by her on 4 October 2011. She indicated that the applicant met the criteria for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, Panic Disorder without Agoraphobia, and Anxiety Disorder not otherwise specified. It was noted that the applicant attempted suicide and continued to harbor thoughts of suicide on a daily basis. It was apparent that the applicant was experiencing multiple and significant mental health issues which render him incapable of continuing military service. She had no reason to believe that the applicant was fabricating any of the symptoms described in his evaluation. However, a Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 6 March 2012, shows the applicant was diagnosed with an Axis I for adjustment disorder & malingering. There was no evidence of mental defect, emotional illness, or psychiatric disorder of sufficient severity to warrant disposition through military medical channels. The applicant was mentally responsible, could distinguish right from wrong, and possessed sufficient mental capacity to understand and participate intelligently as a respondent in any administrative proceedings. The applicant was psychologically cleared for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. The fact the Veterans Administration has granted the applicant service connection for medical conditions the applicant suffered while on active duty does not support a conclusion that these conditions rendered the applicant unfit for further service at the time of his discharge processing. The available medical evidence in the record is void of any indication that the applicant was suffering from a disabling medical or mental condition during his discharge processing that would have warranted his separation processing through medical channels. 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 also requested that the Board consider whether at the time of discharge he was entitled to a physical evaluation board and separation or retirement benefits in accordance with Army Regulation 635-40. The Army Discharge Review Board is not empowered make this decision. The Board may only change the characterization or reason for discharge. If an applicant believes there is an error or injustice in his discharge, he may make an application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, using DD Form 149, which can be obtained online or from a Veterans Service Organization. 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 19 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 AR20170016101 7