1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 7 March 2017 b. Date Received: 20 March 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in pertinent part and in effect, the unsatisfactory performance was based on an APFT failure. After serving over two years, the applicant would like to use the Post 9/11 GI Bill for education and get a job. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 9 January 2019 and by a 3-2 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. (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: 16 February 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 4 January 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: Without any medical limitations, failing two consecutive record APFT conducted on 27 July 2016 and 5 August 2016, and failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on three separate occasions on 24 June 2016, 17 August 2016, and 8 September 2016. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: Waived, 4 January 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: In an undated memorandum / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 16 September 2014 / 3 years, 20 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 105 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 13F10, Fire Support Specialist / 2 years, 5 months, 1 day d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM; ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Negative counseling statements for failing his second APFT on 17 July 2016; failing his APFT on 5 August 2016; and failing to be at his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions. CG Article 15, dated 4 October 2016, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on numerous occasions on 24 June 2016, 17 August 2016, and 8 September 2016. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-2, forfeiture of $409, and 14 days of extra duty. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 19 October 2016, indicates the applicant was cleared, from a psychological perspective, for any administrative action deemed appropriate by his command. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None / NA j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application. 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 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, that commanders will separate a member under this Chapter when, in the commander's judgment, the member will not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in further training and/or become a satisfactory Soldier. Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases. 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 "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. 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, 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. By the unsatisfactory performance, the applicant diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable characterization of service. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant's service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance, such that he should have been retained on Active Duty. The applicant contends his unsatisfactory performance was based on an APFT failure; however, the rationale the applicant provided as the basis for what he believes was an unfair discharge is not supportable by the evidence contained in the record and can only be viewed as speculative in nature. The applicant has expressed his desire to have better job opportunities and the benefits of the GI Bill. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. Further, eligibility for veterans' 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 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 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 9 January 2019 and by a 3-2 vote, the Board denied the request upon finding the separation was both proper and equitable. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214 / Issue a New Separation Order: No b. Change Characterization to: No Change c. Change Reason to: No Change d. Change Authority to: No Change e. Change SPD / 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 AR20170003911 1