1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 9 December 2016 b. Date Received: 27 December 2016 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, she did not receive any counseling until 20 May 2013, the day before her second APFT with no options for remedial PT or plans to improve her APFT performance. The unit did not inform her of any remedial counseling until 20 May 2013, for a plan of action. She feels that she should have not been tested for 21 days for a regular APFT, and her return to full duty occurred on 22 May 2013. The record APFT was given on 21 May 2013, which would have voided the failing result as the APFT was against regulation. Her battalion commander recommended an honorable discharge; however, the brigade commander changed it to general (under honorable condition). She had no negative counseling statements in her record. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 11 April 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. no misconduct), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. (Board member names available upon request) 3. DISCHARGE DETAILS: a. Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Physical Standards / AR 635-200, Chapter 13 / Paragraph 13-2e / JFT / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 18 September 2013 c. Separation Facts: Yes (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 10 June 2013 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reason for her discharge: in that she failed two consecutive Army Physical Fitness Tests. (3) Recommended Characterization: The unit and intermediate commanders recommended an Honorable characterization of service (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 June 2013 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 November 2010 / 4 years b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 years / HS Graduate / 117 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 68W10, Health Care Specialist / 2 years, 10 months, 11 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Mental Status Evaluation dated, 31 May 2013, relates that the applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI, both screens were negative. She was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by command, such as separation under AR 635-200. The applicant received several negative counseling statements for failing the APFT. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application; DD Form 214; Chapter 13 separation packet (39 pages); medical documents (three pages); and six character statements. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of the characterization of service from general, under honorable conditions to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with her application were carefully reviewed. The record confirms that the applicant's discharge was appropriate because of her unsatisfactory performance which diminished the quality of her service below that meriting an honorable discharge at the time of separation. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating either the command's action was erroneous or the applicant's service mitigated the unsatisfactory duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant seeks relief contending, she did not receive any counseling until 20 May 2013, the day before her second APFT with no options for remedial PT or plans to improve her APFT performance. The unit did not inform her of remedial counseling until 20 May 2013, for a plan of action; and she feels that she should not have been tested for 21 days for the regular APFT, after her return to full duty which occurred on 22 May 2013. The record APFT given on 21 May 2013, which would have voided the failing result as the APFT was against regulation. 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 applicant further contends, her battalion commander recommended an honorable discharge; however, the brigade commander changed it to general (under honorable condition). Per AR 635-200, paragraph 2-2c, the separation authority is not bound by the recommendations of the initiating or intermediate commander and has complete discretion to direct any type of discharge and characterization of service authorized by applicable provisions of this regulation. The applicant also contends, she had no negative counseling statements on her record. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of her service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The third party statements provided with the application speak highly of the applicant. However, some of the persons providing the character reference statements were in and some not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, none of these statements provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. 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 11 April 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicant's length of service, and the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. no misconduct), and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to honorable. The Board determined the narrative reason, SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable and voted not to change them. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD Code to: No Change f. Change 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 AR20160019640 2