IN THE CASE OF:  	

      BOARD DATE:  	3 July 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130002511
___________________________________________________________________________

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.



      
      
      Presiding Officer
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Department of the Army Discharge Review Board in this case.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests an upgrade of his general, under honorable conditions discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he should have received an honorable discharge instead of a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  He did not do anything wrong.  He did his best; however, he could not pass the running part of the PT test.  He had shin splints, tendinitis, and problems with his left knee.  He completed the academic portion of his training; but because of the profile he was on he could not complete the course.  He would like to be able to use his GI Bill.  All the other individuals he saw discharged before him received an honorable discharge.
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:		4 February 2013	
b. Discharge Received:		General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge:			10 July 2012		
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	Physical Standards, AR 635-200, Chapter 13-2e 							JFT, RE-3	
e. Unit of assignment:			Delta Co, 447th Signal Battalion, Fort Gordon, GA	
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:	17 October 2011, 5 years, 25 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:	0 years, 8 months, 24 days
h. Total Service:			0 years, 8 months, 24 days
i. Time Lost:				None
j. Previous Discharges:		None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:		E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty:	None
m. GT Score:				101
n. Education:				HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:			None
p. Combat Service:			None
q. Decorations/Awards:		NDSM
r. Administrative Separation Board: 	No
s. Performance Ratings:		None
t. Counseling Statements:		Yes
u. Prior Board Review:			No
SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 October 2011 for a period of 5 years and    25 weeks.  He was 20 years old at the time of entry, a high school graduate, and completed    8 months, and 24 days of active duty service.
SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  On 18 June 2012, the commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13. Specifically for:

	a.  failing two consecutive PT tests held on 10 April 2012, and 1 May 2012;
	b.  being disrespectful in deportment to an NCO on 2 June 2012.

2.  Based on the above incidents, the commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

3.  On 18 June 2012, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board (was not entitled to such a board), and did not submit a statement on his behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  

4.  On 27 June 2012, the separation authority approved and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.  

5.  The applicant was separated on 10 July 2012, under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13-2e, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, physical standards, an SPD code of JFT, and a RE code of 3.   

6.  The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

Three negative counseling statements are contained in the applicant’s record.  Two of the counseling statements are for failing two Army Physical Fitness Tests (AFPT).  One counseling statement dated 2 June 2012, is for walking behind a formation and talking in formation.

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

The applicant provided a DD Form 293, copy of a military ID card, cash collection voucher for the GI Bill, DD Form 2366, and a DD Form 214. 

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

None provided by the applicant.




REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  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.  

2.  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.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered.  

2.  After examining the applicant’s record of service, his military records, and the issues submitted with the application, there are several mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge to honorable for the following reasons:  

      a. The applicant received only one counseling form for a minor infraction.  
      
      b. The two consecutive APFT failures were 3 weeks apart, thus not enough time was given for the applicant to improve his performance.    
      
      c. It appears that on its face value, the counseling statement alone does not warrant a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
      
      d. The applicant contends he was suffering from knee problems and shin splints which prohibited him from passing APFT.  The applicant’s contention is supported by the Report of Medical History, DD Form 280-1, dated 15 May 2012 and DD Form 269, Report of Medical Assessment, dated 16 May 2012.  

4.  In view of the foregoing, it appears the characterization of the discharge is now inequitable and it is recommended the Board grant full relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to honorable.  

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing: Records Review		  Date:   3 July 2013         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  No 

Counsel: None


Board Vote:
Character Change:  2	No Change:  3
Reason Change:	0	No Change:  5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:			No
Change Characterization to:		No Change
Change Reason to:				No Change
Change Authority for Separation:		No Change
Change RE Code to:			No Change
Grade Restoration to:			NA
Other:						NA






























Legend:
AMHRR - Army Military Human Resource Record	FG - Field Grade	IADT – Initial Active Duty Training	 	RE - Reentry
AWOL - Absent Without Leave	GD - General Discharge	NA - Not applicable	SCM- Summary Court Martial
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge	HS - High School	NIF - Not in File	SPCM - Special Court Martial
CG - Company Grade Article 15	HD - Honorable Discharge	OAD - Ordered to Active Duty	UNC - Uncharacterized Discharge  
CID - Criminal investigation Department	MP – Military Police	OMPF - Official Military Personnel File	UOTHC - Under Other Than                           			               Honorable Conditions


ADRB Case Report and Directive (cont)		AR20130002511



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1