1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 11 January 2018 b. Date Received: 31 January 2018 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of an uncharacterized discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, believes when the applicant enlisted and informed the recruiter of a prior medical conditions the applicant was misled. The applicant's recruiter stated "it is unnecessary paperwork," and now the applicant is going through extra paperwork to ensure life is noted ruined over a waiver, if the applicant would have been properly informed. The applicant's recruiter told the applicant to omit the fact the applicant was taking ADHD medicine since the sixth grade. The applicant was under mental distress while in basic training and it was discovered that the applicant had previously taken ADHD medicine. The applicant was not given other options for training and it is the applicant's understanding the recruiter is currently under investigation for instructing the applicant to misrepresent the medical history. 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 ADHD and Adjustment Disorder. The applicant does not have any VA records available for review. In summary, the applicant's discharge was appropriate. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 13 March 2020, 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: Fraudulent Entry / AR 635-200 / Chapter 7, SEC V / JDA / RE-3 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 22 November 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 6 November 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 4 October 2017, he was recommended for separation IAW AR 635-200, CH 5-11 EPTS. It was revealed during counseling that he had prior knowledge of this condition which if known at the time of his enlistment would have precluded him from enlisting. Due to this nondisclosure he fraudulently enlisted in the US Army. (3) Recommended Characterization: Uncharacterized (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 8 November 2017, the applicant waived his rights to consult with a JAG officer. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 17 November 2017 / Uncharacterized 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 5 September 2017 / 5 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / HS Graduate / 115 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / None / 2 months, 18 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: None g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Developmental Counseling Form, dated 12 October 2017, which reflects the applicant was counseled for fraudulent entry. The applicant indicated he was aware of his condition at the time of enlistment; his recruiter was aware of his condition at time of enlistment; and, the MEPS was not aware of his condition at the time of his enlistment. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) Proceedings, dated 4 October 2017, reflects the applicant was diagnosed with: Chronic adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood. History of ADHD with unclear level of school dysfunction. History of self-injurious behaviors. Condition Existed prior to service. If the Service Member's mental health problem had been detected at the time of enlistment, it would have prevented enlistment in the military in accordance with Army Regulation 40-501, Chapter 2-27. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DA Form 4856; DD Form 214; Two DD Forms 293; Congressional Inquiry. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 7, paragraph 7-17 provides, in pertinent part, that a fraudulent entry is the procurement of an enlistment, reenlistment, or period of active service through any deliberate material misrepresentation, omission, or concealment of information which, if known and considered by the Army at the time of enlistment or reenlistment, might have resulted in rejection. This includes all disqualifying information requiring a waiver. A Soldier who concealed his or her conviction by civil court of a felonious offense normally will not be considered for retention. Soldiers separated under Chapter 7 may be awarded an honorable discharge, general, under honorable conditions discharge, or a discharge under other than honorable conditions. If in an entry level status, the discharge will be uncharacterized. 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 uncharacterized discharge to general (under honorable conditions). 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 he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends he did not conceal or omit and information from his recruiters and he was not given other options for training. However, 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. Further, an investigation determined that the applicant failed two tests, as prescribed in AR 635-200, Chapter 7, to determine fraudulent entry. Further, the uncharacterized description of service accurately reflects the applicant's overall record of service. An uncharacterized discharge is neither positive nor negative and it is not meant to be a negative reflection of a Soldier's military service. It merely means that the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for his or her character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. The applicant contends it is his understanding that his recruiter is under investiagtion for the circumstances surrounding the applicant's enlistment. However, the applicant's statements alone do not overcome the presumption of government regularity and the application contains no documentation or further evidence in support of this request for an upgrade of the discharge. 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 13 March 2020, 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 AR20180001559 1