1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 4 December 2016 b. Date Received: 25 December 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, his discharge is inadequate due to his honest and faithful service over a greater period of time during the current period of service, which outweighs his inability to overcome the unfortunate circumstances of his discharge. Given the initial recommendations by the Troop and Squadron Commanders for an Honorable characterization, including his first line supervisor, it is apparent that his reputation as a Soldier did not get disseminated thoroughly. His relationship with the team, squad, and troop remained strong throughout the entire extended administrative separation process. He did everything he could as a senior Service member to set an example for junior members to follow. Supporting documents provided show a track record above reproach. From receipt of his AGCM to positive developmental counseling received, establish a clear "pattern of behavior" conducive to receiving an honorable characterization of service. There are two sets of recommendations concerning the separation and its characterization. The first packet submitted to brigade legal included the Troop and Squadron commanders' letters with recommendations for an honorable characterization. The second packet included letters recommending General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization. When brought to the attention of the servicing Judge Advocate General, it was stated there could have been "Undue Command Influence," although final determination of characterization of service inevitably was determined by Brigade Commander. Such was not explored further due to the extended time between the separation proceedings, January 2015 letter of intent to June 2015- separation from service. Per the Board's Medical Officer, based on the information available for review at the time, SM does not have a mitigating condition, however, it is recommended that the Board take his history of having a concussion and intermittent headaches into consideration. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 January 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, in-service diagnosis of behavioral health issues and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and change to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 13-2e, the narrative reason for separation to Physical Standards, and the separation code to JFT. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Unsatisfactory Performance / AR 635- 200, Chapter 13 / JHJ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 5 June 2015 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 27 April 2015 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant failed to meet the minimum required score in, at least, one event for two consecutive record Army Physical Fitness Tests (APFT). (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 28 April 2015 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 May 2015 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 23 August 2011 / 5 years, 19 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 27 / BS Degree / 119 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 3 years, 9 months, 13 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Korea / None f. Awards and Decorations: AGCM; NDSM; GWOTSM; KDSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant's record contains no UCMJ actions. He was separated at the grade of E-4/SPC. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: The applicant's documentary evidence: Report of Medical History, dated 11 February 2015, indicates the examiner noted the applicant being evaluated for chronic headaches and was under the care of WAMC for TBI/Concussion Care/Neurology. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293 (Application for the Review of Discharge), dated 2 December 2016; DD Form 214 with discharge orders; ERB; AGCM Orders; four counseling statements, dated 3 and 26 November 2014, 26 January 2015, and 2 February 2015; APFT Scorecard, dated 27 October 2014 and 23 January 2015; Administrative Separation Request and packet (three separate notification memoranda), dated 5 March 2015 (Honorable Characterization by unit commander); memorandum for record, dated 3 February 2015; separation authority's decision memorandum, dated 11 May 2015; battalion commander's recommendation, dated 28 April 2015; notification memorandum, dated 17 April 2015 (GD recommendation); extract copies of AR 635-200, Chapter 3 and Chapter 13; Report of Medical History (pages 1 and 3), dated 11 February 2015; and Report Medical Evaluation, dated 11 February 2015. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None provided with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the requirements and procedures for administrative discharge of enlisted personnel. Chapter 13-2e states in pertinent part, that separation proceedings will be initiated for Soldiers without medical limitations that have two consecutive failures of the Army Physical Fitness Test. The reason for discharge will be shown as physical standards. The service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance for failure to meet physical standards will be characterized as honorable or general, under honorable conditions. 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 "JFT" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Paragraph 13-2e as Physical Standards. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JFT" will be assigned an RE Code of 3. It also identifies the SPD code of "JHJ" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, Unsatisfactory Performance. The SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table shows that a Soldier assigned an SPD Code of "JHJ" 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 requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's available record of service, and the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's service 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. The record further confirms he was discharged for the sole reason of failing to meet the minimum standards of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) by failing two consecutive APFTs. However, the service record does not contain any other derogatory information. Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, paragraph 13-2e states, in pertinent part, that separation proceedings will be initiated for Soldiers without medical limitations who have two consecutive failures of the Army Physical Fitness Test, and AR 635-5-1, specifies that the reason for discharge will be shown as physical standards. The applicant contends the discharge was unjust because the two separate separation proceedings initiated, that there could have been an undue command influence, but ultimately, the brigade commander made the final determination. However, there is a presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs that shall be applied in any review unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption. The applicant bears the burden of overcoming this presumption through the presentation of substantial and credible evidence to support his issues. There is no evidence in the record, nor has the applicant produced sufficient evidence to support the contention that he may have been unjustly discharged. The applicant's statements alone do not overcome the government's presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further sufficient evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. In consideration of the applicant's service accomplishments and quality of his service prior to the two APFT failures, the Board can find that his complete period of service was or was not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of his characterization of service. Although the applicant did not raise any behavioral health issues, a careful review of the available record indicates the applicant's behavioral health issues symptoms existed. If the Board determines the applicant's behavioral health issues were significant contributing factors to the bases for his discharge, it can grant appropriate relief by changing the reason for separation and/or the characterization of service. 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 31 January 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the discharge was too harsh based on the applicant's length and quality of service, in-service diagnosis of behavioral health issues and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and change to the separation authority to AR 635-200, Chapter 13-2e, the narrative reason for separation to Physical Standards, and the separation code to JFT. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: Physical Standards d. Change Authority to: AR 635-200, Chapter 13-2e e. Change SPD/RE Code to: Change SPD to JFT / No change to RE code f. Restore Grade 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 AR20160019302 3