1. Applicant's Name: a. Application Date: 1 September 2020 b. Date Received: 9 September 2020 c. Counsel: None 2. REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: a. Applicant's Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period under review is General (Under Honorable Conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, the discharge was not fair. The applicant was a good Soldier who could not pass the Army physical fitness test (APFT) due to medical conditions for right ingrown toe issues, right foot, and ankle pain from diagnosed plantar fasciitis, fascial fibromatosis, and flat feet from running and ruck marching and wearing personal protective equipment while deployed to Germany and Poland from September 2017 until March 2018. The applicant was given APFTs the day after profiles ended to make the applicant fail on purpose. The applicant was a combat lifesaver and received an Army Achievement Medal for excellent achievement. The unit would not allow the applicant to heal. They were intolerant of valid medical conditions. The applicant was not considered a Soldier once the applicant's feet and ankle conditions started causing severe pain. There were times when the applicant was given an APFT every day for 2 weeks. The applicant was sent to do the APFT before sick call opened. The unit made it their business to kick the applicant out and ruin the applicant's future education opportunities. The applicant's morale was really low because the applicant's friend committed suicide and the applicant was harassed with physical training. The applicant's foot pain would not allow for the applicant to wear running shoes and boots properly and could not run due to pain. The applicant believes the applicant would have made an excellent Soldier if the applicant was given the opportunity to heal. A physician diagnosed the applicant with plantar fasciitis and issued custom orthotics. On 30 August 2020, the applicant won a gold medal at a Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu mixed martial arts competition which proves the applicant can be physically fit when the body is allowed to heal. b. Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 25 August 2023, and by a 5-0 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service mitigating the applicant's APFT failures. 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. Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision. (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: 19 February 2019 c. Separation Facts: (1) Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: NIF (2) Basis for Separation: NIF (3) Recommended Characterization: NIF (4) Legal Consultation Date: NIF (5) Administrative Separation Board: NA (6) Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 16 January 2018 4. SERVICE DETAILS: a. Date / Period of Enlistment: 18 October 2016 / 4 years, 22 weeks b. Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / High School Graduate / 102 c. Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-3 / 19D10, Calvary Scout / 2 years, 4 months, 2 days d. Prior Service / Characterizations: None e. Overseas Service / Combat Service: Poland / None f. Awards and Decorations: AAM, NDSM, GWTSM, ASR g. Performance Ratings: NA h. Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: The applicant's Enlisted Record Brief (ERB), dated 5 September 2018, reflects the applicant was flagged for elimination - field initiated (BA), effective 24 August 2018, and for APFT failure (JA), effective 1 May 2019: as ineligible for reenlistment due to pending separation (9V). The applicant failed the APFT in August 2018. The Assignment Eligibility Availability (AEA) code reflects AEA code "L" which has no assignment restrictions. FLAGS / AEA codes: BA, JA / L RE/Prohibition codes: 9V The applicant's DD Form 214, reflects the applicant had not completed the first full term of service. The applicant was discharged under the authority of AR 635-200, paragraph 13-2e, with a narrative reason of Physical Standards. The DD Form 214 was authenticated with the applicant's electronic signature. i. Lost Time / Mode of Return: None j. Behavioral Health Condition(s): (1) Applicant provided: None (2) AMHRR Listed: None 5. APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: DD Form 293; DD Form 214; enlisted record brief; Commander Request for Mental Status Evaluation Memorandum; medical records; photo. 6. POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Won a gold medal in a Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu mixed martial arts competition. 7. STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): a. Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides 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), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides 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, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma. b. Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities' last names (2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. (1) Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification 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. (2) 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. c. Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board), sets forth the policies and procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years of the Servicemember's date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10 United States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. d. Army Regulation 635-200 provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. (1) Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or description of separation. (2) Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate. (3) Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. (4) Chapter 13 contains the policy and outlines the procedures for separating individuals for unsatisfactory performance, and provides, in pertinent part, 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. (5) Paragraph 13-2c (previously paragraph 13-2e) states in pertinent part, 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. (6) Paragraph 13-8, stipulates the service of Soldiers separated because of unsatisfactory performance will be characterized as honorable or under honorable conditions as warranted by their military records. e. 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 "JFT" as the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, in effect at the time, Chapter 13-2e, Physical standards. f. Army Regulation 601-210, Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program, governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. Table 3-1, defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waiverable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted. 8. SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28. The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's Army Military Human Resources Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully reviewed. The applicant's AMHRR is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to the discharge from the Army. The applicant's AMHRR does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was authenticated by the applicant's electronic signature. The applicant's DD Form 214 indicates the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AR 635-200, Chapter 13, paragraph 13-2e, by reason of physical standards with a characterization of service of general (under honorable conditions). The applicant contends, in effect, the discharge was not fair. The applicant was a good Soldier who could not pass the APFT due to medical conditions for right ingrown toe issues, right foot, and ankle pain from diagnosed plantar fasciitis, fascial fibromatosis, and flat feet. The applicant provided the commander's request for MSE that reflects the applicant gets along with others in the unit and with supervisors fine and a good Soldier. The applicant also provided medical records that reflects while in Poland in 2017 the applicant was seen for joint pain in the right little toe because the applicant kicked a rock and felt pain immediately afterwards. The pinky toe had swelling and discoloration and worsened when running. After returning to Fort Riley, medical records reflects on 11 July 2018 the applicant was seen for right heel pain and a diagnosis for plantar fascial fibromatosis. On 5 September 2018, the applicant was seen for right foot pain plantar fascial fibromatosis. On 10 September the doctor ordered two pair of over-the-counter orthotics. The applicant would benefit from custom orthotic support due to plantar fasciitis and pes planus, and feet overflow of regular over the counter Power steps Protech Mets. In September and October 2018, the applicant has medical history at the Farrelly Health Clinic, Fort Riley in the physical therapy clinic for pain in the right ankle and joints of the right foot due to plantar fasciitis. The applicant contends, in effect, the applicant was given APFTs the day after profiles ended, every day for 2 weeks, and prior to sick call opened to make the applicant fail on purpose. The medical records provided by the applicant reflects, in July 2018 the applicant had a run at own pace profile. In September 2018 the applicant was on a limited duty profile for 3 weeks. The applicant did not provide and the AMHRR is void of the applicant's profiles and APFT scorecards. The AMHRR contains an ERB that reflects the applicant failed the APFT in August 2018. The applicant had a flag for APFT failure (JA), effective 1 May 2019. The applicant contends, in effect, the unit would not allow the applicant to heal, and the applicant was harassed with physical training. There is no evidence in the AMHRR the applicant sought assistance or reported the harassment. The applicant contends, in effect, the applicant was a combat lifesaver and received an Army Achievement Medal for excellent achievement. The Board will consider the applicant's service accomplishments and the quality of service according to the DODI 1332.28. The applicant contends, in effect, on 30 August 2020, the applicant won a gold medal at a Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu mixed martial arts competition which proves the applicant can be physically fit when the body is allowed to heal. 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 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. 9. BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: a. As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following factors: (1) Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The Board's Medical Advisor reviewed DoD and VA medical records and found no mitigating BH diagnoses on the applicant. The applicant provided no documents or testimony of a condition or experience, that, when applying liberal consideration, could have excused or mitigated a discharge. (2) Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? N/A (3) Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? N/A (4) Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? N/A b. Response to Contention(s): (1) The applicant contends being a good Soldier who could not pass the APFT due to medical conditions for right ingrown toe issues, right foot, and ankle pain from diagnosed plantar fasciitis, fascial fibromatosis, and flat feet. The Board considered this contention and determined that it was valid. The applicant's medical conditions, combined with the applicant's length and quality of service, made the characterization of service inequitable. Therefore, an upgrade to Honorable characterization is warranted. (2) The applicant contends the applicant was given APFTs the day after profiles ended, every day for 2 weeks, and prior to sick call opened to make the applicant fail on purpose. The Board considered this contention during proceedings but ultimately did not address it after determining to upgrade the applicant's characterization as seen above in 9b(1). (3) The applicant contends, in effect, the discharge was not fair. The Board considered this contention during proceedings but ultimately did not address it after determining to upgrade the applicant's characterization as seen above in 9b(1). c. The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the applicant's length and quality of service mitigating the applicant's APFT failures. 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. d. Rationale for Decision: (1) The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable because length and quality of service mitigating the applicant's APFT failures. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. (2) The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or accompanying SPD code as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and equitable. (3) The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the regulation. 10. BOARD ACTION DIRECTED: a. Issue a New DD-214: Yes b. Change Characterization to: Honorable c. Change Reason / SPD Code to: No Change d. Change RE Code to: No Change e. Change Authority to: No Change Authenticating Official: Legend: AWOL - Absent Without Leave AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge BH - Behavioral Health CG - Company Grade Article 15 CID - Criminal Investigation Division ELS - Entry Level Status FG - Field Grade Article 15 GD - General Discharge HS - High School HD - Honorable Discharge IADT - Initial Active Duty Training MP - Military Police MST - Military Sexual Trauma N/A - Not applicable NCO - Noncommissioned Officer NIF - Not in File NOS - Not Otherwise Specified OAD - Ordered to Active Duty OBH (I) - Other Behavioral Health (Issues) OMPF - Official Military Personnel File PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RE - Re-entry SCM - Summary Court Martial SPCM - Special Court Martial SPD - Separation Program Designator TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge UOTHC - Under Other Than Honorable Conditions VA - Department of Veterans Affairs ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE AR20210005243 1