1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 September 2017 b. Date Received: 10 October 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable and a narrative reason change. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the applicant was told by the Staff Judge Advocate that the Battalion Commander recommended an honorable characterization, but a general (under honorable conditions) discharge was marked on the separation paperwork. The applicant contends that the narrative reason assigned for discharge, "Unsatisfactory Performance", is improper. The service records shows, the applicant's only deficiency was the inability to pass the Army's physical fitness 2-mile run standard test. The applicant states that during out-processing from the Army, the applicant received the advice of the Staff Judge Advocate, and upon the legal advice the applicant signed and acknowledged that the Battalion Commander approved an honorable discharge. However, the separation paperwork given to the applicant indicated the Battalion Commander signed and directed the applicant's discharge characterization as general (under honorable conditions). On 25 April 2017, the applicant submitted a formal FOIA request to the FOIA Office at Fort Polk. On 30 June 2017, the FOIA request was received. It was then that the error was disclosed, the Battalion Commander had signed and directed the applicant be separated from the Army with a characterization of Honorable. A general (under honorable conditions) discharge is given when a service member has received non-judicial punishments, but not for a serious offense. The applicant has no disciplinary infractions by either the military or civilian authorities. The applicant requests the Board change the characterization to "Honorable" and the narrative reason for separation to "Physical Fitness Failure." In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 31 May 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 13-12e, 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: 21 April 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 24 March 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: On or about 16 September 2016, he failed to achieve a minimum score of 60 points in the 2-mile run event of a record Army Physical Fitness Test; and, On or about 21 November 2016, he failed to achieve a minimum score of 60 points in the 2-mile run event of a record Army Physical Fitness Test. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: 3 April 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 11 April 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 March 2016 / 3 years, 16 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 90 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-2 / 12C10, Bridge Crewmember / 1 year, 2 months, 17 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: Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecard, reflects the applicant failed record APFTs on 16 September 2016 and 21 November 2016. Acknowledgement of Administrative Separation (memo), dated 12 April 2017, reflects the applicant acknowledged receipt of the approved recommendations of the initiation of separation resulting in the applicant being separated from the Army with an Honorable discharge. The applicant provided a copy of the separation authority decision memorandum, dated 17 April 2017, obtained through a Freedom of Information Request, which reflects the separation authority directed the applicant's separation with an Honorable discharge. This decision memorandum was not included in the applicant's separation packet or in the applicant's service record. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 9 December 2016, 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. The applicant was diagnosed with: Occupational Problem. 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD From 149; DD Form 214; DD Form 293; Congressional Inquiry; self-authored statement; Orders 103-0312; Memorandum to separation authority; separation packet. 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. 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. 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 and a narrative reason change. 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 his characterization should reflect honorable, because the separation authority approved an honorable discharge, after he initially approved a general (under honorable conditions) 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. Army policy states that a general, under honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, an honorable discharge may be granted in meritorious cases. The character of the applicant's discharge is commensurate with his overall service record. Further, the decision letter the applicant provided was not included in the applicant's separation packet; and, therefore, government regularity prevails. The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge should be changed to Physical Fitness Failure. However, the applicant was separated under the provisions of Chapter 13, AR 635-200 with a general (under honorable conditions). The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Unsatisfactory Performance," and the separation code is "JHJ." Based on the specific reason cited for the applicant's discharge, the failure of two consecutive APFT failures, the applicant should have been separated under the providsions of AR 635-200, chapter 13, paragraph 13-2e, Physical Standards and a spearation code of "JFT". Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation. 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 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 May 2019, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined the discharge is inequitable. Therefore, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable and changed to the separation authority to AR 635-200, paragraph 13-12e, 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, paragraph 13-12e e. Change SPD / RE Code to: JFT / 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 AR20170015274 1