1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 6 December 2018 b. Date Received: 16 January 2019 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, an upgrade will allow the applicant to better life with the ability of using the GI Bill on school and to be able to use a VA Home loan. The applicant has tried one's best to stay employed after being separated from the military. There are careers the applicant is not able to do due to nerve damage, which occurred during a 5-mile run, such as hard labor jobs to careers with the police force. The applicant wants to study computer science to hopefully become a software developer for a DOD company, which would allow use of the technical skills the military gave to the applicant. The applicant failed the APFT three times, which in the first instance, was injured from nerve damage in the left side of the body, from the foot to shoulder. The second time the applicant failed by 18 seconds on the run, which the applicant learned was being timed by three stop watches that all reflected different times. The applicant wrote a report fighting the failed APFT test, but two days later the commander and first sergeant told the nine Soldiers they were being separated with an honorable discharge. Two weeks after failing the APFT, the applicant, along with other Soldiers, underwent a mental and physical evaluation. The Soldiers were told they would not have more chances to pass the test again, no more heavy labor, PT with battery or alone; and, they could not pull a 24 hour shift with their battery. Two months after failing the second APFT test, three of the Soldiers were told to get ready to take another APFT test. The applicant states, they only had one week to prepare, but still could not work out unless they risked the chance of getting hurt. Any injury would be on them and not the military. Due to the nerve damage and not being able to prepare for the test without the fear of doing more damage to the nerves, the applicant failed the APFT. The applicant attempted to run the first mile, but shortly after starting the 2-mile run, the applicant began having severe pain from the knee to hip and could not finish the APFT test and the test was terminated because the applicant did not complete the run. Since then, the applicant has went several times to the VA Hospital to get PT and OT to help, in order for it not to hurt as severe. Per the Board's Medical Officer, a voting member, based on the information available for review at the time in the service record, the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), and Joint Legacy Viewer (JLV), notes indicate diagnoses of Major Depressive Disorder, Unspecified Trauma and Stressor Related Disorder. The applicant is 50% service- connected for Major Depressive Disorder. In summary, the applicant's BH diagnoses are not mitigating for the misconduct which led to separation from the Army. In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 May 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge. 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 13-2E / JFT / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) b. Date of Discharge: 13 December 2017 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: Commander's Report, dated 29 September 2017, reflects the specific, factual reasons for the separation action: Failure of two consecutive record Army Physical Fitness Tests within 90 days of one another. (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 29 September 2017 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 28 July 2015 / 3 years, 35 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 21 / HS Graduate / 96 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 14E10, Patriot FC Operator / 2 years, 4 months, 16 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Guam / None f. Awards and Decorations: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Commander's Report as described in previous paragraph 3c. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Diagnosed PTSD / TBI / Behavioral Health: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 214; DD Form 293; third-party statement; Criminal History Record. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: The applicant provided evidence that he has obtained employment. 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 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 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. The applicant contends he was told he could not do exercise, which contributed to him failing the APFT. 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 an upgrade of his discharge would allow educational benefits through the use of the GI Bill and VA loan. However, eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill and VA loans, do 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 Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge. However, there is no law or regulation which provides an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time or good conduct in civilian life subsequent to leaving the service. Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant's performance and conduct during the period of service under review, is considered during Board proceedings. The Board reviews each discharge on a case-by-case basis to determine if post-service accomplishments help demonstrate previous in-service misconduct was an aberration and not indicative of the member's overall character. 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 third party statement provided with the application spoke highly of the applicant's performance. The author recognized his good performance after leaving the Army; however, the person providing the character reference statement was not in a position to fully understand or appreciate the expectations of the applicant's chain of command. As such, the statement did not provide any evidence sufficiently compelling to overcome the presumption of government regularity. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it will be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof and provide the appropriate documents (i.e., the discharge packet) or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board's consideration because they are not available in the official record. Based on the available record, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation, was within the discretion of the separation authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. 9. BOARD DETERMINATION: In a records review conducted at Arlington, VA on 6 May 2020, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length of service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge. 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 AR20190005211 1