IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 June 2015 CASE NUMBER: AR20140009698 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. Presiding Officer I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case. THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his discharge is an injustice because he should have been separated for medical reasons. He states, he passed out during the APFT and was diagnosed with a heart murmur. He states, his scores for the APFT tests continued to get lost. DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION: a. Application Receipt Date: 2 June 2014 b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 15 August 2011 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: Physical Standards, AR 635-200, Chapter 13-2e, JFT, RE-3 e. Unit of assignment: C Company, 369th Signal Battalion, Fort Gordon, GA f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 3 August 2010/4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 1 year, 13 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 13 days i. Time Lost: None j. Previous Discharges: None k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2 l. Military Occupational Specialty: None m. GT Score: 103 n. Education: HS Graduate o. Overseas Service: None p. Combat Service: None q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM r. Administrative Separation Board: NA s. Performance Ratings: NA t. Counseling Statements: Yes u. Prior Board Review: No SUMMARY OF SERVICE: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 August 2010, for a period of 4 years. He was 20 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. His record is void of any significant acts of valor or achievement; however, he completed 1 year and 13 days of active duty service. When his discharge proceedings were initiated, he was serving at Fort Gordon, GA. SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: 1. The applicant’s service record shows that on 1 August 2011, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200, by reason of failure to meet physical standards; specifically for failing six consecutive Army physical fitness tests. 2. The unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights. 3. On 1 August 2011, the applicant waived his right to consult with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 4. On 5 August 2011, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. The applicant was not transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group. 5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 15 August 2011, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 6. The applicant’s service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost. EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD: 1. DA Form 3822-R (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), dated 9 June 2011, reflects the applicant was mentally responsible and had clear and normal thought content and process. 2. Seven negative counseling statements dated between 19 October 2010 and 13 June 2011, for failing one diagnostic APFT and six End of Course (EOC) APFT tests. 3. Commander’s Report, dated 1 August 2011, reflects the applicant was being processed for a medical discharge however the discharge was delayed pending the results of an echocardiogram which later turned out negative for any problems. EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT: The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 25 May 2014 and a DD Form 214. POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: The applicant did not provide any in support of his application. REGULATORY AUTHORITY: 1. 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. 2. 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. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION: 1. The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. 2. After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to honorable for the following reasons: a. The applicant successfully completed basic combat training and passed the APFT in order to graduate and proceed to advance individual training. b. The applicant was discharged for the sole reason of failing to meet the minimum standards of the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). 3. The applicant’s service record does not contain any other derogatory information which would warrant a general, under honorable conditions characterization of service. 4. The record shows the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case. 5. In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable. Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation, the Board determined the discharge to be proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING: Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 19 June 2015 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? NA Counsel: None Witnesses/Observers: NA Board Vote: Character Change: 0 No Change: 5 Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5 (Board member names available upon request) Board Action Directed: Issue a new DD Form 214: No Change Characterization to: No Change Change Reason to: No Change Change Authority for Separation: NA Change RE Code to: NA Grade Restoration to: NA Other: NA Legend: AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record FG - Field Grade IADT – Initial Active Duty Training RE - Reentry AWOL - Absent Without Leave GD - General Discharge NA - Not applicable SCM- Summary Court Martial BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge HS - High School NIF - Not in File SPCM - Special Court Martial CG - Company Grade Article 15 HD - Honorable Discharge OAD - Ordered to Active Duty UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge CID - Criminal investigation Department MP – Military Police OMPF - Official Military Personnel File UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont) AR20140009698 Page 2 of 5 pages ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB) CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE 1