BOARD DATE: 17 December 2014

CASE NUMBER: AR20140001108

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.


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

2. The applicant states, in effect, he requests an upgrade of his discharge to honorable to establish a stellar civilian profile and become a paramedic.


a. Application Receipt Date: 13 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 30 May 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), AR 635-200, Chapter 14 Paragraph 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment: HHC, Regimental Special Troops Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment, Fort Benning, GA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 24 July 2012, 4 years and 19 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service: 9 months, 13 days
h. Total Service: 9 months, 13 days
i. Lost time: 24 days
j. Previous Discharges: None
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-2
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 11B1P, Infantryman
m. GT Score: 118
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: None
p. Combat Service: None
q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: No
s. Performance Ratings: None
t. Counseling Statements: Yes
u. Prior Board Review: No


The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 July 2012, for a period of 4 years and 19 weeks. He was 18 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B1P, Infantryman. His record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements; and he achieved the rank of PV2/E-2. He was serving at Fort Benning, GA when his discharge was initiated.


1. The evidence contained in the applicants service record indicates on 3 May 2013, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct abuse of illegal drugs; specifically, for the following offenses:

a. wrongfully using methamphetamine (130331), and

b. breaking restriction on divers occasions (130417-130501).

2. Based on the above misconduct, the unit commander recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge and advised the applicant of his rights.

3. The applicants election of rights and a statement on his own behalf are not contained in the available record and government regularity is presumed in the discharge process. 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 22 May 2013, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 30 May 2013, with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c(2), AR 635-200, for misconduct (drug abuse), with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK and a RE code of 4.

6. The applicants record of service indicates 24 days of time lost for being AWOL from 5 May 2013 until 28 May 2013, mode of return unknown.

7. The applicants service record does not contain any action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).


1. The applicant received six negative counseling statements, dated between 15 April 2013 and 3 May 2013, for testing positive for an illegal substance, pass privileges being revoked, breaking restriction, failing to follow instructions, disobeying a lawful order, and a command directed buddy watch.

2. The record contains a positive urinalysis report coded PO (Probable Cause), dated 2 April 2013, for d-amphetamine and d-methamphetamine.

3. The record contains two DA Forms 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 6 May 2013 and 30 May 2013, showing the applicants present for duty and AWOL dates.


The applicant provided a DD Form 293, a DD Form 214, a letter, Stark State College, and a student detail schedule.


The applicant stated in his application he is attending college to become a paramedic.


1. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, convictions by civil authorities and desertion or being absent without leave. Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impractical or unlikely to succeed. Army policy states that an under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally considered appropriate; however, a general, under honorable conditions or an honorable discharge may be granted.

2. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the members 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. Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

3. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldiers separation specifically allows such characterization.


1. The applicants request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicants record of service, his military records, the issues and documents submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.

2. The record confirms the applicants 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, by violating the Army’s policy not to possess or use illegal drugs, compromised the trust and confidence placed in a Soldier. The applicant, as a Soldier, had the duty to support and abide by the Army’s drug policies. By abusing illegal drugs, the applicant knowingly risked a military career and diminished the quality of his service below that meriting an honorable discharge. The applicants record of service was marred by six negative counseling statements, a positive urinalysis report, and two DA Forms 4187.

3. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command’s action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the misconduct or poor duty performance.

4. The applicant contends he needs an upgrade of his discharge to honorable to establish a stellar civilian profile. This contention is not a matter upon which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion related to the discharge process, nor is it associated with the discharge at the time it was issued.

5. The applicants post-service accomplishments have been noted as outlined on the application and in the documents with the application. However, in review of the applicants entire service record and the reasons for the discharge, these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and the characterization of service granted.

6. The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.

7. Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, the analyst recommends the Board deny relief.


Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 17 December 2014 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify, NA

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Board Vote:
Character Change: 0 No Change: 5
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: NA
Change RE Code to: NA
Grade Restoration to: NA
Other: NA

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) AR20140001108

Page 6 of 6 pages