1. Applicant’s Name: a. Application Date: 19 February 2020 b. Date Received: 20 February 2020 c. Counsel: Yes 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 through counsel requests an upgrade to honorable, narrative reason, separation code and reentry code change. The applicant through counsel seeks relief contending, in effect, for the foregoing reasons, it is respectfully requested the applicant's discharge be upgraded from “Uncharacterized” to “Honorable”, the narrative reason for separation and separation code from reflecting “Fraudulent Enlistment” to "Secretarial Authority" and the reentry code from:” RE-3” to "RE-1". The applicant has demonstrated through this appeal there was no intention to conceal information to warrant a fraudulent enlistment and displayed honesty and integrity in everything. Regardless of any legal error or actions by chain of command, the applicant is remorseful for not completing basic training and wishes not to place blame on anyone. It would be in the interest of justice to grant the applicant an honorable discharge to restore the applicant’s good name. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 1 March 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: Fraudulent Entry / AR 635-200, Chapter 7, SEC IV / JDA / RE-3 / Uncharacterized b. Date of Discharge: 14 March 2018 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 23 February 2018. (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On 9 January 2018, the applicant was recommended for separation IAW AR 635-200, CH 5-11 EPTS. It was revealed during counseling the applicant had prior knowledge of this condition which if known at the time of enlistment would have precluded the applicant from enlisting. Due to this nondisclosure, the applicant fraudulently enlisted in the US Army. (3) Recommended Characterization: Uncharacterized (4) Legal Consultation Date: On 28 February 2018, the applicant waived legal counsel. (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 9 March 2018 / Uncharacterized 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 January 2018 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / High School Graduate / 94 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-1 / None / 2 months, 7 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: None i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) Proceedings, dated 30 January 2018, reflect the applicant was diagnosed with: Adjustment disorder with depressed mood, insomnia secondary to psychiatric condition, ADHD by history. Condition Existed before 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 per Army Regulation 40-501, Chapter 2-27. The Service Member should be expeditiously separated from active duty in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 5-11. Service Member should be immediately removed from all training. Service Member should not have access to weapons or sensitive information. Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) Proceedings, dated 30 January 2018, reflect Past Mental Health History: Service Member (SM) reports history of diagnosis and treatment of ADHD. SM reports taking Vyvanse while in middle school until Spring of 2017. SM reports poor academic performance when not taking the Vyvanse in college so had to restart. SM's mother confirms history of diagnosis with ADHD and treatment with Vyvanse. On 31 January 2018 the applicant agreed with the finding and requested to be discharged from the US Army without delay. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293, Attorney brief; DD Form 4; Commander’s Initiation memo; medical records. 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 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 7-17 provides, in pertinent part, 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. (4) Paragraph 7-23 stipulates a Soldier discharged under the provisions of this chapter will be furnished DD Form 256A or assigned a character of service of under other than honorable conditions. If in entry-level status, service will be described as uncharacterized, as appropriate. In addition to chapter 3, section II, the following factors will be considered in determining the character of service to be issued during the current period of service: Evidence of pre-service misrepresentation that would have precluded, postponed, or otherwise affected the Soldier’s enlistment eligibility. Characterization will normally be under other than honorable conditions if the fraud involves concealment of a prior separation in which service was not characterized as honorable. The offense of fraudulent enlistment (10 USC 883; Art 83 UCMJ) occurs when the Soldier accepts pay or allowances following enlistment procured by willful and deliberate false representation or concealment of his/her qualifications. Therefore, upon receipt of pay and allowances, it becomes an in-service activity by the Soldier and may be considered in characterizing his/her period of service, even though he/she is not tried for the offense. When the individual is in an AWOL status, or in desertion, or in the hands of civil authorities, the provisions of chapter 2, section III, must be followed. (5) 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 “JDA” as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 7, paragraph 7-17, fraudulent entry. 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-1 Applies to: Person completing his or her term of active service who is considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army. Eligibility: Qualified for enlistment if all other criteria are met. 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. RE-4 Applies to: Person separated from last period of service with a nonwaiverable disqualification. This includes anyone with a DA imposed bar to reenlistment in effect at time of separation, or separated for any reason (except length of service retirement) with 18 or more years active Federal service. Eligibility: Ineligible for enlistment. 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, and a narrative reason, separation code and reentry code change. The applicant’s Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHR), the issues and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant contends, in effect, never concealed or omitted any information from the recruiters. The applicants AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command. An investigation determined the applicant failed one test, as prescribed in AR 635-200, Chapter 7, to determine Fraudulent Entry. The applicant contends, in effect the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 7, paragraph 7-17, AR 635-200 with an uncharacterized discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is “Fraudulent Entry, SEC IV” and the separation code is “JDA.” 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 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, in effect, the SPD code should be changed. The SPD codes are three- character alphabetic combinations that identify reasons for, and types of, separation from active duty. The primary purpose of SPD codes is to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation. They are intended exclusively for the internal use of DoD and the Military Services to assist in the collection and analysis of separation data. The SPD Codes are controlled by OSD and then implemented in Army policy AR 635-5-1 to track types of separations. The SPD code specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under Chapter 7, Section V, is “JDA.” The applicant contends, in effect, there was no intention to conceal information to warrant a fraudulent enlistment and displayed honesty and integrity in everything. Entrance Physical Standards Board (EPSBD) Proceedings, dated 30 January 2018, reflect Past Mental Health History: Service Member (SM) reported history of diagnosis and treatment of ADHD. SM reported taking Vyvanse while in middle school until Spring of 2017. SM reported poor academic performance when not taking the Vyvanse in college so had to restart. SM's mother confirms history of diagnosis with ADHD and treatment with Vyvanse. On 31 January 2018, the applicant agreed with the finding and requested to be discharged from the US Army without delay. The applicant requests a reentry eligibility (RE) code change. Soldiers processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Based on Army Regulation 601-201, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE code of “3.” An RE Code of “3” indicates the applicant requires a waiver before being allowed to reenlist. Recruiters can best advise a former service member as to the Army’s needs at the time and are required to process waivers of reentry eligibility (RE) codes if appropriate. 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: pre-enlistment diagnosis of ADHD with treatment for years, discontinuing for enlistment. Moreover, the applicant reported suicidality prior to starting Basic Training. In-service, an Adjustment Disorder diagnosis was added. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The applicant held a pre-enlistment diagnosis of ADHD with treatment for years, discontinuing for enlistment. Moreover, the applicant reported suicidality prior to starting Basic Training. In- service, an Adjustment Disorder diagnosis was added. (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that documentation reflects the applicant knowingly withheld a pre-enlistment condition that would have required a waiver. Moreover, after enlisting, and pending Basic Training, the applicant reported depression with suicidality that the applicant also chose not to note on moment of truth (MMOT) paperwork once at Basic Training. The applicant had no intention on reporting these difficulties until seeking a discharge and learned of the EPTS option. (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. Despite the Board’s application of liberal consideration, the Board considered the opinion of the Board’s Medical Advisor, a voting member, that the available evidence confirms the applicant intentionally withheld a service-limited condition which would not fall under liberal consideration guidance. b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends never concealing or omitting any information from the recruiters. The Board considered this contention and determined that it is contradicted with evidence of record and applicant’s own testimony. In terms of timeframes for reporting, MEPS and MMOT paperwork does not limit reporting to only the prior 24 months as asserted. (2) The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge and accompanying SPD code need changed. The Board considered this contention but determined there was no evidence supplied to support it, and the discharge was proper and equitable. (3) The applicant contends there was no intention to conceal information to warrant a fraudulent enlistment and displayed honesty and integrity in everything. The Board considered this contention and determined that it is contradicted with evidence of record and applicant’s own testimony. In terms of timeframes for reporting, MEPS and MMOT paperwork does not limit reporting to only the prior 24 months as asserted. (4) The applicant requests a characterization upgrade and reentry eligibility (RE) code change. The Board considered this contention and determined that UNC is the proper characterization of service as the applicant’s service was not long enough to be properly assessed. A general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions is not authorized under ELS conditions and an honorable discharge (HD) is rarely ever granted. An HD may be given only in cases which are clearly warranted by unusual circumstances involving outstanding personal conduct and/or performance of duty. 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 means the Soldier has not been in the Army long enough for a character of service to be rated as honorable or otherwise. c. The Board determined that the discharge is, at this time, proper and equitable, considering the current evidence of record. 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 of all the evidence before the Board, the applicant’s pre- existing medicated ADHD treatment was intentionally withheld from the enlistment process and the willfully concealed condition is service-limited. 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 AR20200001892 1