BOARD DATE: 19 May 2014

CASE NUMBER: AR20140001441

Board Determination and Directed Action

After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the examiners 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 condition to honorable.

2. The applicant states, in effect, that his discharge was based on a one time infraction which occurred within 28 months of service with no other adverse actions. His service to his country and his records prior to the discharge incident was unquestionable.


a. Application Receipt Date: 22 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: General, Under Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 11 October 2012
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Drug Abuse), 14-12c(2), JKK, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment: D, Btry, 3-4 ADA Reg, Fort Bragg, NC
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 20 July 2010, 4 years, 26 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 2 months, 22 days
h. Total Service: 2 years, 2 months, 22 days
i. Time Lost: None
j. Previous Discharges: None
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist
m. GT Score: 92
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: SWA
p. Combat Service: United Arab Emirates (110508-120507)
q. Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTEM, GWOTSM, ASR, OSR
r. Administrative Separation Board: No
s. Performance Ratings: None
t. Counseling Statements: Yes
u. Prior Board Review: No

The applicants record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 July 2010, for a period of 4 years and 26 weeks. He was 17 years old at the time of entry and a HS Graduate. He was trained in and awarded MOS 74D10, Chemical Operations Specialist. His record shows he served a combat tour; however, he did not earn any awards for acts of valor or meritorious achievements; and he achieved the rank of PFC/E-3. He was serving at Fort Bragg, NC when his discharge was initiated.


1. The evidence contained in the applicants service record shows that on 6 September 2012, 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, for wrongfully using marijuana (120603-120703).

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

3. On 6 September 2012, the applicant was afforded the opportunity to consult with legal counsel and declined, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, 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 10 September 2012, the separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions.

5. The applicants record of service does not contain any documented evidence of unauthorized absences, lost time or any negative counseling statements.

6. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 11 October 2012, 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), a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKK and an RE code of 4.


1. An Article 15, dated 30 July 2012 for wrongfully using marijuana (120603-120703); the punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1, forfeiture of $745 pay x 2 months (suspended), extra duty for 30 days, and an oral reprimand, (FG).

2. The record does not contain any other relevant information.


The applicant provided a DD Form 293, dated 25 January 2014, and a DD Form 214.


None submitted with the application.


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.

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 the incident that caused his discharge was the only one in his entire Army career. Although a single incident, the discrediting entry constituted a departure from the standards of conduct expected of Soldiers in the Army. The applicable Army regulation states there are circumstances in which the conduct or performance of duty reflected by a single incident provides the basis for a characterization. The applicant’s incident of misconduct adversely affected the quality of his service, brought discredit on the Army, and was prejudicial to good order and discipline.

5. The applicant contends that he had good service prior to the discharge incident which remains unquestionable. The applicants service accomplishments and the quality of his service prior to the incident that 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.

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, recommend the Board deny relief.


Type of Hearing: Personal Appearance Date: 19 May 2014 Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify, Yes

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: (W) Mr. Johnnie Lee Joe, Cousin; (O) Della Lyles, Mother


1. The applicant submitted the following additional documents:

a. USA Chemical Corps Regiment cert 1 page
b. USA Leonard Wood training cert 1 page
c. USA Diploma CBRN School 1 page
d. USA Combat Patch cert 1 page
e. USA Basic Combat Training Center cert 1 page
f. Promotion Order to PV2 cert 1 page

2. The applicant presented no additional contentions.

In addition to the evidence in the record, the Board carefully considered the additional documents and testimony presented by the applicant at the personal appearance hearing.

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) AR20140001441

Page 5 of 6 pages