BOARD DATE: 5 December 2014

CASE NUMBER: AR20140001464

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, that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge. He contends over the last five years he has grown as a person; learned responsibility and duty, learned to put others above him, and has taken a positive step towards achieving his goals each and every day. He understands the mistakes he made. It has been five years since his separation, and he regrets his mistakes. He has more dreams and aspirations for his life, and his discharge is something that is keeping him from reaching those goals, both personally and through the eyes of others. He believes he has paid for his mistakes by losing the possibility of a career in the military, something that could have shaped him into a better and more honorable person. He loved the Army life and he made the choice to throw it all away because he just didn’t know how to give all of himself to a greater good. He now requests his discharge be upgraded to honorable so that he can continue in a positive direction with his life.


a. Application Receipt Date: 16 January 2014
b. Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions
c. Date of Discharge: 10 October 2007
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE: Misconduct (Serious Offense), AR 635-200, Chapter
14, Paragraph 14-12c, JKQ, RE-3
e. Unit of assignment: 581st MD Co (R), Fort Hood, TX
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 5 January 2005, 3 years and 26 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service: 2 years, 8 months, 4 days
h. Total Service: 2 years, 8 months, 4 days
i. Time Lost: 32 days
j. Previous Discharges: None
k. Highest Grade Achieved: E-3
l. Military Occupational Specialty: 63B10, Wheeled Vehicle Mechanic
m. GT Score: 125
n. Education: HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service: None
p. Combat Service: None
q. Decorations/Awards: MUC, NDSM, GWOTSM, 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 5 January 2005, for a period of 3 years and 26 weeks. He was 19 years old at the time entry and a high school graduate. He was serving at Fort Hood, TX, when his discharge was initiated. The record does not contain any evidence of acts of valor or meritorious achievements.


1. The evidence contained in the applicants service record indicates on 23 August 2007, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct (serious offense). Specifically for the following offenses:

a. receiving a FG Article 15, for the wrongful use of a controlled substance (i.e. methamphetamines),

b. receiving a FG Article 15, for five counts of failure to go to his appointed place of duty, and

c. receiving a CG Article 15, for two counts of assault.

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

3. On 28 August 2007, the applicant waived his right to consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army and waiver of further rehabilitative efforts. The intermediate commanders reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

4. The separation authority waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicants discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.

5. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 10 October 2007, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, for misconduct (serious offense), with a Separation Program Designator code (SPD) of JKQ and a RE code of 3.

6. The applicants record of service indicates 32 days of time lost for going AWOL from 28 September 2005, until his return on 30 October 2005.


1. Two DA Form 4187s (Personnel Action), dated 29 September 2005 and 31 October 2005, changing the applicant’s duty status from present for duty (PDY) to absent without leave (AWOL) and AWOL to PDY.

2. Article 15, imposed on 15 December 2005, for failure to go at the time prescribes to his appointed place of duty x 3 (050919, 050920, and 051102), going AWOL (050928-051030), and being absent from his place of duty (050908). The punishment consisted of forfeiture of $617.00 per month for two months (suspended) and extra duty for 29 days (FG).

3. A Military Police Report dated 19 December 2006, which indicates the applicant was the subject of an investigation for assault (domestic disturbance) and spouse abuse.

4. Article 15, imposed on 3 April 2007, for unlawfully striking E.B., on the leg with his leg and unlawfully grabbing E.B’s wrists and pushing her with his hands, causing her to fall onto the table, and subsequently, to the floor (061216). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-3 (suspended), extra duty for 14 days (suspended) (CG).

5. There is a positive urinalysis report contained in the record coded; IU (Inspection Unit), 5 March 2007, DAMP and DMETH.

6. Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) Enrollment, which indicates the applicant was referred as a result of improper use of drugs.

7. Article 15, imposed on 18 May 2007, for wrongful use of methamphetamine and destroamphetamine between (070202 and 070305). The punishment consisted of reduction to E-1 and extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

8. Several negative counseling statements dated between 14 September 2005 and 3 July 2007, for failure to report, going AWOL, failing to be at his appointed place of duty on several occasions, domestic violence, being out of rank, failure to pay debts, being late for formations, and not reporting for extra duty.


The applicant provided an online application, dated 10 January 2014,


None were provided 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, the documents and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to merit an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.

2. The record confirms that 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. By the misconduct, the applicant diminished the quality his service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge. The applicants record of service was marred by three Articles 15 for multiple violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which included a positive drug test, assault, and several negative counseling statements.

3. The applicant was aware that 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.
4. The applicant contends that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge. The record shows the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age. There is no evidence to indicate the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.

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

6. 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. The character of the applicants discharge is commensurate with his overall service record

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: 5 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) AR20140001464

Page 6 of 6 pages