1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 21 October 2017 b. Date Received: 20 December 2017 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: The applicant requests an upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, that he would like an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of starting the process to become a police officer so he can continue to serve his community. He contends that he sustained a minor injury to his right shoulder during airborne operations. He was unaware of his injury until the first Physical Fitness test afterward. He contends his shoulder locked out and he was unable to complete the 42 pushups. He missed it by 1, because of the many injuries sustained to members of his platoon. He recently decided to keep quiet about his problem because of upcoming live fire exercises. He refused to let his platoon down so he refused medical attention. He performed live fires, while flagged, as a M240B gunner. He performed exceedingly well and was told by his squad leader "If you weren't flagged then we would be awarding you with an AAM and a battalion coin. His injury hadn't healed by the time of the next PT test and he failed by two pushups. On the date of his discharge he received multiple phone calls saying his name had been called out at an award ceremony. He was to receive those awards stating that he did his job very well. He contends he was an exceptional Soldier and member of his battalion. He never received any negative marks, Article 15's, or Court Martial. He believes to have his record sullied by a "General (Under Honorable Conditions) Discharge seems unfair. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 24 October 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. no misconduct, just failure to meet standards), 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: 8 February 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 20 January 2017 (2) Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: failing to achieve a minimum of 60 points in the push-up event of a record Army Physical Fitness Test on 19 August 2016 and 16 November 2016. (3) Recommended Characterization: Honorable (4) Legal Consultation Date: 20 January 2017 (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: NIF / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 8 September 2015 / 4 years, 21 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 18 / HS Graduate / 123 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 11B1P, Infantryman / 2 years, 1 month, 22 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: USAR, 17 December 2014 to 7 September 2015 / NA e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: None h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Army Physical Fitness Test Scorecards, dated 19 August 2016 and 16 November 2016. Report of Mental Status Evaluation, dated 5 January 2017, which shows the applicant was mentally responsible and had the mental capacity to understand and participate in administrative proceedings. The applicant was screened for PTSD and mTBI. Neither were evident. The applicant was appropriated for any administrative action deemed appropriated by his command. Counseling statements in reference to the failure of the Army Physical Fitness Test. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: NIF 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application. 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 of unsatisfactory performance which diminished the quality of his 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 seeks relief contending that he sustained a minor injury to his right shoulder during airborne operations. He was unaware of his injury until the first Physical Fitness test afterward. He contends his shoulder locked out and he was unable to complete 42 pushups. He missed it by 1, because of the many injuries sustained to members of his platoon recently he decided to keep quiet about his problem because of upcoming live fire exercises. He refused to let his platoon down so he refused medical attention. He performed live fires, while flagged, as a M240B gunner. He performed exceedingly well and was told by his squad leader "If you weren't flagged then we would be awarding you with an AAM and a battalion coin. His injury hadn't healed by the time of the next PT test and he failed by two pushups. On the date of his discharge he received multiple phone calls saying his name had been called out at an award ceremony. He was to receive those awards stating that he did his job very well. He contends he was an exceptional Soldier and member of his battalion. He never received any negative marks, Article 15's, or Court Martial. He believes to have his record sullied by a "General (Under Honorable Conditions) Discharge seems unfair. The applicant's contentions were noted; however, the service record does not support the applicant's contention, and no evidence to support it has been submitted to corroborate the discharge was the result of any medical condition. Further, the record does not contain any medical evidence to indicate a problem which would have rendered the applicant disqualified for further military service at the time of discharge. The applicant expressed his desire for an upgrade of his discharge for the purpose of starting the process to become a police officer so he can continue to serve his community. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities. 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 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 24 October 2018, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the circumstances surrounding the discharge (i.e. no misconduct, just failure to meet standards), 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 AR20170019336 1