BOARD DATE: 12 December 2014

CASE NUMBER: AR20140001170

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicants record of service during the period of enlistment under review and notwithstanding the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined that the characterization of service was too harsh based on the applicants length and quality of his service to include the circumstances surrounding his discharge based on component equity and minor disciplinary infraction with no other derogatory information in his record of service, and as a result it is inequitable. Accordingly, the Board voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The Board determined the reason for discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. This action entails restoration of grade to E-3/PFC.

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 to upgrade the characterization of his service from under other than honorable to fully honorable.

2. The applicant states, in pertinent part and in effect, he feels his chain-of-command abandoned him. While preparing to leave with his unit for pre-deployment training, he received another set of orders for Utah for two days of training. He was unsure so he immediately contacted an NCO who agreed to pick up the orders from him to handle, but the NCO never showed up. Another Soldier took his place because no response was made to the set of orders and it resulted in being discharged due to an AWOL status. He has his certificates, which shows being an honor graduate in basic training. He has tried obtaining an employment with the state patrol and sheriffs department, but his current discharge would not allow it. Prior to his discharge, he had nothing negative on his background report. Documentary evidence shows his character is exemplifying, hard working, and an honest person with integrity.


a. Application Receipt Date: 14 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 14 June 2013
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: AR 135-178
e. Unit of assignment: 807 MC Cmd MDSC Admin Det, Salt Lake City, UT
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 10 May 2011, 8 years (USAR)
g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 1 month, 5 days
h. Total Service: 2 years, 1 month, 5 days
i. Time Lost: NIF
j. Previous Discharges: USAR (110510-111003) / NA
IADT (111004-120308) / HD
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 68R10, Veterinary Food Inspector
m. GT Score: NIF
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: NIF
u. Prior Board Review: No


The record shows the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve on 10 May 2011, for a period of 8 years. He was 22 years old at the time of entry and a high school graduate. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 68R10, Veterinary Food Inspector. His record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement. He completed 2years, 1 month, and 5 days of reserve and active duty service.


1. The available evidence shows the applicants record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events that led to his discharge from the United States Army Reserve.

2. The record indicates that on 7 June 2013, Department of the Army, Headquarters, 88th Regional Support Command, For McCoy, WI, Orders 13-158-00072, discharged the applicant from the United States Army Reserve, effective 14 June 2013, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On the same orders, the applicant was reduced to E-1, pursuant to AR 600-8-19, paragraph 10-15.

3. The applicants service record does not contain any evidence of unauthorized absences or time lost.


There are no negative counseling statements or any further adverse actions available.


The applicant provided reassignment orders, dated 10 January 2013; orders for annual training, dated 14 January 2013; certificate of achievement; basic training graduate diploma; character reference letter, dated 4 November 2013; separation orders for service under current review; and DD Form 214, dated 8 March 2012.


The documentary evidence provided by the applicant reflects that he is employed.


1. Army Regulation 135-178 sets forth the policies, standards, and procedures to ensure the readiness and competency of the U.S. Army while providing for the orderly administrative separation of Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted Soldiers for a variety of reasons. The separation policies throughout the different Chapters in this regulation promote the readiness of the Army by providing an orderly means to judge the suitability of persons to serve on the basis of their conduct and their ability to meet required standards of duty performance and discipline. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, and commission of a serious offense, to include abuse of illegal drugs, and convictions by civil authorities.

2. The characterization is based upon the quality of the Soldiers service, including the reason for separation and determined in accordance with standards of acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty as found in the UCMJ, Army Regulations, and the time-honored customs and traditions of the Army. The reasons for separation, including the specific circumstances that form the basis for the discharge are considered on the issue of characterization.

3. Possible characterizations of service include an honorable, general, under honorable conditions, under other than honorable conditions, or uncharacterized if the Soldier is in entry-level status. However, the permissible range of characterization varies based on the reason for separation.


1. The applicants request for an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge was carefully considered. However, after examining the applicants record of service, the documents and issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge. The service record is void of the specific facts and circumstances concerning the events which led to his discharge from the Army Reserve.

2. The applicants record contains a properly constituted set of orders which was authenticated by the appropriate military authority. This document identifies the characterization of the discharge and the presumption of government regularity prevails in the discharge process.

3. Barring evidence to the contrary, it appears all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.

4. The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command’s action was erroneous or that his service mitigated the type of discharge he received from the U.S. Army Reserve.

5. The applicant contends his command abandoned him during the period he received orders to report for training at another location and his contentions were carefully considered. However, the facts and circumstances leading to the discharge are unknown. The burden of proof remains with the applicant to provide the appropriate documents such as the discharge packet or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration. The applicants statements alone do not overcome the governments presumption of regularity and no additional corroborating and supporting documentation or further evidence has been provided with the request for an upgrade of the discharge. If the applicant desires a personal appearance hearing, it would still be his responsibility to meet the burden of proof since the discharge packet is not available in the official record.

6. The applicant contends that he had good service which included being an honor grad at his basic training. The applicants service accomplishment and the quality of his service prior to the incidents that may have caused the initiation of discharge proceedings were carefully considered. However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge.

7. The applicant contends that an upgrade of his discharge will allow him to obtain employment with the state patrol or sheriffs department, and provided his current employers supporting letter. However, the Board does not grant relief for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.

8. Therefore, based on the available evidence, it appears the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, thus recommend the Board deny relief.


Type of Hearing: Records Review Date: 12 December 2014 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify, NA

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA

Board Vote:
Character Change: 4 No Change: 1
Reason Change: 0 No Change: 5
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new Discharge Order: Yes
Change Characterization to: General, Under Honorable conditions
Change Reason to: No Change
Change Authority for Separation: NA
Change RE Code to: NA
Grade Restoration to: E-3/PFC
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) AR20140001170

Page 2 of 5 pages