1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 24 March 2019 b. Date Received: 7 June 2019 c. Counsel: 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The current characterization of service for the period under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, throughout his military career, he pushed himself and those around him to be the best they could be. He cannot say that he did everything perfect, but he never had any major incidents or was the cause of any problems. The applicant states, a few weeks after the school year started, he went out to celebrate and ended up drinking with some classmates that were not of legal age. He is not proud of his choice but it happened and there were consequences for his actions. The applicant states a fellow classmate borrowed his vehicle and while he was using the vehicle had accident and left the scene. The applicant made an insurance claim and misinterpreted what his friend told him over the phone when he made his insurance claim. The police gave him a couple of tickets and said they were going to look into insurance fraud. Later, he was informed his battalion commander had started paperwork to chapter him out of the Army. The applicant states, he was never convicted, charged, or even questioned by the police for insurance fraud. He never intended to report a fraudulent claim, he was just trying to get his vehicle fixed. Since his discharge, he has worked full-time and continues to further himself. He purchased his first home and is raising three wonderful dogs. The next big step he would like to take is to further his education/training but cannot due to his discharge. The applicant, along with his family, friends, and Soldiers that he served with, believe he had more than an honorable military career. He has continued to live up to all Army values after his military career to become a leader in his community. The applicant further details the contentions in an allied sell-authored statement provided with the application. In a records review conducted on 10 September 2021, 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: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / AR 635-200 / Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 24 June 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NIF (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 21 June 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 18 July 2011 / 6 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 17 / HS Graduate / 120 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 15D1S, Aircraft Powertrain Repairer / 3 years, 11 months, 7 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Afghanistan (4 April 2013 - 5 June 2013; 5 February 2014 - 2 April 2014) f. Awards and Decorations: ACM-CS, ARCOM, USAF MUAR, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: NIF i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; self- authored statement; 17 third party statements; resume; three Certificates of Achievement; DA Form 4950; Permanent Orders 321- 08; seven Certificates of Training; three Certificates of Achievement; Certificate of Admission from West Point; Letter of Admission; Enlisted Record Brief; and, DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant states, he has continued to help those around or those in need. He purchased his first home and is raising three wonderful dogs. 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 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) 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. (5) Paragraph 14-3, prescribes a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record. (6) Paragraph 14-12c prescribes 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. 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 "JKQ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, misconduct (serious offense). 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. DISCUSSION 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 record of service, the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his 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 DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, by reason of Misconduct (Serious Offense), with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service. The applicant contends, the incident, which led to his discharge was an isolated incident. Army Regulation 635-200, in pertinent part, stipulates circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant contends he has never been convicted, charged, or even questioned by the police for insurance fraud. He has made mistakes in the Army but does not believe the outcome of this situation was fair. The AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. The applicant contends, he would like to further his education/training and become a pillar in his community. 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 applicant contends, after the military he continued to help those around him or those in need; has obtained multiple automotive mechanical certifications; works full-time; and, purchased his first home. The Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post- service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. No law or regulation provides for the upgrade of an unfavorable discharge based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life after leaving the service. 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 third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. They all recognize the applicant's good conduct after leaving the Army. 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 DoD and VA medical records and found the applicant has been diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and PTSD-all of these conditions are potentially mitigating depending upon the nature of the misconduct. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Applicant 's diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder was made while he was in the Army. However, applicant's VA diagnoses of Anxiety DO, MDD and PTSD are not service-connected by the VA. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor, after liberally considering the evidence before the Board, opined applicant's actions that were the basis for separation, including the applicant carrying out insurance fraud were not spontaneous or unpremeditated; rather, the applicant's misconduct was conscious, purposeful and performed over time in order to obtain a financial goal. The evidence before the Board does not support that such misconduct has a nexus with applicant's Adjustment DO, Anxiety DO, MDD and PTSD, and therefore cannot excuse or mitigate those contended actions that were applicant's basis for separation. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the ADRB's application of liberal consideration of the evidence before the Board including the applicant's contention that insurance fraud was the basis for his separation, the Board concurred with the opinion of the Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the applicant's medical conditions of Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder and PTSD do not excuse or mitigate the applicant's basis for separation. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends good service, including a combat tour. The Board considered the service accomplishments and the quality of service during its deliberations. (2) The applicant contends, the incident of insurance fraud which led to his discharge was an isolated incident. The record confirms the applicant's discharge was appropriate because the quality of the applicant's 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. By committing insurance fraud, the applicant diminished the quality of service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. (3) The applicant contends he has never been convicted, charged, or even questioned by the police for insurance fraud. He has made mistakes in the Army but does not believe the outcome of this situation was fair. The evidence liberally considered before the Board, including the applicant's medical conditions, do not support the contention that the basis for separation was inappropriate or unfair. (4) The applicant contends, he would like to further his education/training and become a pillar in his community. Eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill or healthcare, 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. The Board does not grant relief to gain employment or enhance employment opportunities. (5) The applicant contends, after the military he continued to help those around him or those in need; has obtained multiple automotive mechanical certifications; works full-time; and, purchased his first home. The Board recognizes and appreciates the applicant's willingness to serve and considered this contention during board proceedings c. The Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. The Board determined that the documentation contained in the AMHRR, as well as evidence submitted by the applicant, and the available medical evidence did not support a finding that the applicant's discharge was improper or inequitable. However, the applicant may request a personal appearance hearing to address the issues before the Board. 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, despite applying liberal consideration, the applicant's contention that insurance fraud was the basis for his separation, is not excused or mitigated by the applicant's Adjustment Disorder, Anxiety Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder and PTSD diagnosis, because the applicant's misconduct was conscious, purposeful and performed over time in order to obtain a financial goal; and such behavior is inconsistent symptoms of applicant's diagnoses. 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, as 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 AR20190008663 1