1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 August 2017 b. Date Received: 2 August 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 effect, upon initially reading the separation paper work, the applicant was told that it would result in an honorable discharge for a PT failure. Later, the company commander told the applicant that he wanted to make an example of the applicant and others that were failing and changed the recommendation to a general discharge. The applicant went to JAG, who informed the applicant to write a letter to the commander explaining why the applicant should have an honorable discharge. After writing the letter, the commander decided to continue with the recommendation, despite the applicant having the support of sergeants and coworkers. The applicant believed that there was nothing that could be done to change it until learning, after discharge, that the applicant could request an upgrade after waiting six months. The applicant is trying to go to school and get a good job, but without an honorable discharge, the applicant receives no education benefits, and potential jobs are lost once the employer sees a general discharge. The applicant should have had an honorable discharge because of never having any Article 15s or negative counseling. The applicant had a great work ethic. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 20 March 2019, 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, the circumstances surrounding the discharge, 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: Unsatisfactory Performance / AR 635- 200 / Chapter 13 / JHJ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 15 December 2016 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 2 November 2014 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: failed six record APFT's between 27 May 2015 and 27 July 2016, including four consecutive record APFT's on 16 March 2016, 2 May 2016, 8 June 2016 and 27 July 2016. (3) Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) (4) Legal Consultation Date: 8 November 2016 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 29 November 2016 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 17 March 2014 / 5 years, 32 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 25 / Some College / 109 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 88M10, Motor Transport Operator / 2 years, 8 months, 29 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 22 July 2015, reflects the applicant was cleared for any administrative actions deemed appropriate by the command. The applicant could understand the difference between right and wrong and could participate in the proceedings. Three Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecards, reflect the applicant failed record APFTs on 27 May, 16 July and 28 August 2015; and, 16 March, 2 May, 8 June and 27 July 2016. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application and DD Form 214. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application. 7. REGULATORY CITATION(S): Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation 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. 8. DISCUSSION OF FACT(S): The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant's record of service, the issues and documents submitted with his application were carefully reviewed. The 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. It brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline. 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 he was initially told that he would receive an honorable discharge, but later was told that he would be made an example of and would receive a general discharge. 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 character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. The applicant contends that he had good service. The applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered. The applicant is to be commended for his accomplishments. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill. However, eligibility for veteran's 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 applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain better employment. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 20 March 2019, 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, the circumstances surrounding the discharge, 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 / 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 AR20170011760 1