1.	Applicant's Name: 

   a.	Application Date: 26 April 2021

   b.	Date Received: 26 April 2021

   c.	Counsel: None

2.	REQUEST, ISSUES, BOARD TYPE, AND DECISION: 

   a.	Applicant's Requests and Issues: The current characterization of service for the period 
under review is general (under honorable conditions). The applicant requests an upgrade to 
honorable. 

The applicant seeks relief contending, in effect, not being educated on the Army policy regarding 
wrongful cohabitation, but the living condition was known to the chain of command. The applicant 
states when an Article 15 was imposed, charging the applicant with adultery, wrongful 
cohabitation, and lying to a commissioned officer, the applicant sought an appeal, which was 
denied. The appeal was based on insufficient evidence to substantiate the charges of adultery. 
The applicant will not be able to obtain the earned benefits as a veteran, including the GI Bill the 
applicant paid into. Because of the injustice, the military record has been tainted. The applicant 
is hesitant to declare being a veteran when having to tell others the discharge was the result of 
adultery. The war in Iraq was ending, and they were looking for any method to discharge 
surplus Soldiers without paying benefits.

   b.	Board Type and Decision: In a records review conducted on 19 October 2023, and by a 
3-2 vote, the Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the 
applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, compassion for the 
applicant's personal hardship and length of time since the discharge. Accordingly, the Board 
voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to Honorable. 
The Board determined the narrative reason/SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable 
and voted not to change them.
Please see Section 9 of this document for more detail regarding the Board's decision. 

(Board member names available upon request)

3.	DISCHARGE DETAILS:

   a.	Reason / Authority / Codes / Characterization: Misconduct (Serious Offense) / 
AR 635-200, Chapter 14-12c / JKQ / RE-3 / General (Under Honorable Conditions) 

   b.	Date of Discharge: 23 August 2011

   c.	Separation Facts

       (1)	Date of Notification of Intent to Separate: 28 July 2011 

       (2)	Basis for Separation: The applicant was informed of the following reasons: 

On 24 May 2011, the applicant made two false official statements; 

between 7 April and 22 May 2011, the applicant wrongfully endeavored to impede an 
investigation; and

between 7 January and 19 April 2011, the applicant wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a 
person not the applicant's spouse.

Additionally, between 24 January and 19 April 2011, the applicant wrongfully cohabitated with a 
person not the applicant's spouse, and between 14 and 20 May, 1 June, and 27 July 2011, the 
applicant failed to go at the time prescribed to the appointed place of duty. 

       (3)	Recommended Characterization: General (Under Honorable Conditions) 

       (4)	Legal Consultation Date: 28 July 2011 

       (5)	Administrative Separation Board: NA 

       (6)	Separation Decision Date / Characterization: 30 July 2011 / General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) 

4.	SERVICE DETAILS:

   a.	Date / Period of Enlistment: 19 March 2008 / 3 years / The service was extended at the 
request and for the convenience of the government in support of contingency operation.

   b.	Age at Enlistment / Education / GT Score: 19 / GED / 120

   c.	Highest Grade Achieved / MOS / Total Service: E-4 / 91D10, Power-Generation 
Equipment Repairer / 3 years, 5 months, 5 days

   d.	Prior Service / Characterizations: None

   e.	Overseas Service / Combat Service: SWA / Iraq (14 December 2008 - 28 November 
2009; 10 June 2011 - 7 August 2011)

   f.	Awards and Decorations: ICM-3CS, ARCOM, MUC, AGCM, NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR, 
OSR

   g.	Performance Ratings: NA

   h.	Disciplinary Action(s) / Evidentiary Record: Ten Developmental Counseling Forms for 
various acts of misconduct. 

FG Article 15, 18 June 2011, for making false official statements on two separate occasions on 
24 May 2011; wrongfully impeding an investigation between 1 April and 22 May 2011; between 
7 January and 19 April 2011, wrongfully having sexual intercourse with a person, not the 
spouse; and between 24 January and 19 April 2011, wrongfully cohabitating with a person, not 
the spouse. The punishment consisted of a reduction to E-1; forfeiture of $733 pay per month 
for one month (suspended); and extra duty and restriction for 45 days. On 18 June 2011, the 
applicant, having been advised of the right to appeal, elected to not appeal.

Report of Mental Status Evaluation (page 1 of 3), 22 July 2011, reflects the applicant could 
understand and participate in administrative proceedings; could appreciate the difference 
between right and wrong; and met medical retention requirements. There was no diagnosis. 

   i.	Lost Time / Mode of Return: None

   j.	Behavioral Health Condition(s): 

       (1)	Applicant provided: None

       (2)	AMHRR Listed: Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status (with Line of 
Duty Investigation), 2 February 2010, reflects the applicant was admitted as a patient in the 
Darnall Army Medical Center for suicide attempt on 26 January 2010.

5.	APPLICANT-PROVIDED EVIDENCE: Online application and DD Form 214.

6.	POST SERVICE ACCOMPLISHMENTS: None submitted with the application.

7.	STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND POLICY REFERENCE(S): 

   a.	Section 1553, Title 10, United States Code (Review of Discharge or Dismissal) provides 
for the creation, composition, and scope of review conducted by a Discharge Review Board(s) 
within established governing standards. As amended by Sections 521 and 525 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, 10 USC 1553 provides specific guidance to the 
Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge Review Boards when 
considering discharge upgrade requests by Veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder 
(PTSD), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual trauma, intimate partner violence (IPV), or spousal 
abuse, as a basis for discharge review. The amended guidance provides that Boards will include, 
as a voting board member, a physician trained in mental health disorders, a clinical psychologist, 
or a psychiatrist when the discharge upgrade claim asserts a mental health condition, including 
PTSD, TBI, sexual trauma, IPV, or spousal abuse, as a basis for the discharge. Further, the 
guidance provides that Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records and Discharge 
Review Boards will develop and provide specialized training specific to sexual trauma, IPV, 
spousal abuse, as well as the various responses of individuals to trauma.

   b.	Multiple Department of Defense Policy Guidance Memoranda published between 2014 
and 2018. The documents are commonly referred to by the signatory authorities' last names 
(2014 Secretary of Defense Guidance [Hagel memo], 2016 Acting Principal Deputy Under 
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Carson memo], 2017 Official Performing 
the Duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Kurta memo], and 
2018 Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness [Wilkie memo]. 

       (1)	Individually and collectively, these documents provide further clarification to the Military 
Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records when considering 
requests by Veterans for modification of their discharge due to mental health conditions, including 
PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. Liberal consideration will be given to Veterans 
petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on matters 
relating to mental health conditions, including PTSD; TBI; sexual assault; or sexual harassment. 
Special consideration will be given to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) determinations that 
document a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment potentially 
contributed to the circumstances resulting in a less than honorable discharge characterization. 
Special consideration will also be given in cases where a civilian provider confers diagnoses of a 
mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment if the case records 
contain narratives supporting symptomatology at the time of service or when any other evidence 
which may reasonably indicate that a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual 
assault/harassment existed at the time of discharge might have mitigated the misconduct that 
caused a discharge of lesser characterization.

       (2)	Conditions documented in the service record that can reasonably be determined to 
have existed at the time of discharge will be considered to have existed at the time of discharge. 
In cases in which a mental health condition, including PTSD; TBI; or sexual assault/harassment 
may be reasonably determined to have existed at the time of discharge, those conditions will be 
considered potential mitigating factors in the misconduct that caused the characterization of 
service in question. All Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in cases 
in which serious misconduct precipitated a discharge with a less than Honorable characterization 
of service. Potentially mitigating evidence of the existence of undiagnosed combat related PTSD, 
PTSD-related conditions due to TBI or sexual assault/harassment as causative factors in the 
misconduct resulting in discharge will be carefully weighed against the severity of the misconduct. 
PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct. Caution shall be exercised in weighing 
evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal 
relationship of symptoms to the misconduct. 

   c.	Army Regulation 15-180 (Army Discharge Review Board) sets forth the policies and 
procedures under which the Army Discharge Review Board is authorized to review the character, 
reason, and authority of any Servicemember discharged from active military service within 15 years 
of the Servicemember's date of discharge. Additionally, it prescribes actions and composition of 
the Army Discharge Review Board under Public Law 95-126; Section 1553, Title 10, United 
States Code; and Department of Defense Directive 1332.41 and Instruction 1332.28. 

   d.	Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separation) provides the 
basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

       (1)	Chapter 3, Section II provides the authorized types of characterization of service or 
description of separation. 

       (2)	Paragraph 3-7a states an Honorable discharge is a separation with honor and is 
appropriate when the quality of the Soldier's 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. 

       (3)	Paragraph 3-7b states a General discharge is a separation from the Army under 
honorable conditions and is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not 
sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

       (4)	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. 

       (5)	Paragraph 14-3 prescribes a discharge under other than honorable conditions is 
normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter. However, the separation 
authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier's overall record.

       (6)	Paragraph 14-12c prescribes a Soldier is subject to action per this section for 
commission of a serious military or civilian offense, if the specific circumstances of the offense 
warrant separation and a punitive discharge is, or would be, authorized for the same or a closely 
related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial.

   e.	Army Regulation 635-5-1 (Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes) provides the 
specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty, 
and the SPD codes to be entered on the DD Form 214. It identifies the SPD code of "JKQ" as 
the appropriate code to assign enlisted Soldiers who are discharged under the provisions of 
Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, paragraph 12c, misconduct (serious offense). 

   f.	Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Reserve Components Enlistment Program) 
governs eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing of persons 
into the Regular Army, the U.S. Army Reserve, and Army National Guard for enlistment per DODI 
1304.26. It also prescribes the appointment, reassignment, management, and mobilization of 
Reserve Officers' Training Corps cadets under the Simultaneous Membership Program. 
Chapter 4 provides the criteria and procedures for waiverable and nonwaiverable separations. 
Table 3-1 defines reentry eligibility (RE) codes: RE-3 Applies to: Person who is not considered 
fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is 
waiverable. Eligibility: Ineligible unless a waiver is granted.

8.	SUMMARY OF FACT(S): The Army Discharge Review Board considers applications for upgrade 
as instructed by Department of Defense Instruction 1332.28.

The applicant requests an upgrade to honorable. The applicant's Army Military Human Resources 
Record (AMHRR), the issues, and documents submitted with the application were carefully 
reviewed.

The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The applicant 
was separated under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200 with a 
general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative reason specified by Army 
Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Misconduct (Serious Offense)," and the 
separation code is "JKQ." Army Regulation 635-8, Separation Processing and Documents, 
governs the preparation of the DD Form 214, and dictates the entry of the narrative reason for 
separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be as 
listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes. The 
regulation stipulates no deviation is authorized. There is no provision for any other reason to be 
entered under this regulation.

The applicant contends not being educated on the Army policy regarding wrongful cohabitation; the 
military record has been tainted because of the injustice; the applicant was denied appealing the 
Article 15; and there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the adultery charge. The AMHRR 
indicates on 18 June 2011, the applicant, having been advised of the right to appeal, elected to 
not appeal. The applicant's AMHRR does not contain any indication or evidence of arbitrary or 
capricious actions by the command.

The applicant contends not being able to obtain the earned benefits as a veteran, including the 
GI Bill the applicant paid into. Eligibility for veterans' benefits to include educational benefits 
under the Post-9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army 
Discharge Review Board. Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance. 

The applicant's AMHRR contains medical documentation indicating the applicant was treated 
for suicide attempt. The AMHRR shows the applicant underwent a mental status evaluation 
(MSE) on 22 July 2011, which indicates the applicant could understand and participate in 
administrative proceedings; could appreciate the difference between right and wrong; and met 
medical retention requirements. There was no diagnosis.

9.	BOARD DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION: 

   a.	As directed by the 2017 memo signed by A.M. Kurta, the board considered the following 
factors: 

       (1)	Did the applicant have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the 
discharge? Yes. The Board's Medical Advisor, a voting member, reviewed the applicant's DOD 
and VA health records, applicant's statement, and/or civilian provider documentation and found 
that the applicant has the following potentially-mitigating diagnoses/experiences: Adjustment 
Disorder, Bipolar II Disorder. 										
						 
       (2)	Did the condition exist or experience occur during military service? Yes. The Board's 
Medical Advisor found that the applicant was diagnosed in service with an Adjustment Disorder 
and Bipolar II Disorder.					

       (3)	Does the condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? No. The 
Board's Medical Advisor applied liberal consideration and opined that the applicant's Adjustment 
Disorder and Bipolar II Disorder do not mitigate the discharge. There is no natural sequela 
between an Adjustment Disorder, Bipolar II Disorder, and making false official statements, 
impeding an investigation, adultery, or wrongful cohabitation since neither of these conditions 
interfere with the ability to distinguish between right and wrong and act in accordance with the 
right. And while Bipolar II Disorder or an Adjustment Disorder may mitigate FTRs in some 
cases, the medical record reveals that applicant's BH conditions were resolved in March 2010 
over a year before the FTRs occurred. There is no evidence to support that these conditions 
existed at the time of the FTRs or contributed in any way to this misconduct. Therefore, there is 
no medical mitigation.							 

       (4)	Does the condition or experience outweigh the discharge? No. After applying liberal 
consideration to the evidence, including the Board Medical Advisor opine, the Board determined 
that the available evidence did not support a conclusion that the applicant's Adjustment Disorder 
and Bipolar II Disorder outweighed the applicant's medically unmitigated offenses of making 
false official statements, impeding an investigation, adultery, or wrongful cohabitation. 

   b.	Response to Contention(s): 

       (1)	The applicant contends the narrative reason for the discharge needs changed. The 
Board considered this contention but determined that the applicant's Serious Offense narrative 
reason is proper and equitable given the applicant's medically unmitigated offenses of making 
false official statements, impeding an investigation, adultery, or wrongful cohabitation

       (2)	The applicant contends not being educated on the Army policy regarding wrongful 
cohabitation; the military record has been tainted because of the injustice; the applicant was denied 
appealing the Article 15; and there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the adultery charge. 
The Board found insufficient evidence in the applicant's AMHRR or applicant-provided evidence to 
show that the evidence. The Board considered this contention and found insufficient evidence in 
the applicant's AMHRR or applicant-provided evidence to support the presence of impropriety in 
the applicant's discipline and separation processes.

       (3)	The applicant contends not being able to obtain the earned benefits as a veteran, 
including the GI Bill the applicant paid into. The Board considered this contention and 
determined that eligibility for Veteran's benefits, to include educational benefits under the Post-
9/11 or Montgomery GI Bill, healthcare or VA loans, do not fall within the purview of the Army 
Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.

   c.	The Board determined that the characterization of service was inequitable based on the 
applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, compassion for the 
applicant's personal hardship and the length of time since the discharge. Accordingly, the Board 
voted to grant relief in the form of an upgrade to the characterization of service to Honorable. 
The Board determined the narrative reason/SPD code and RE code were proper and equitable 
and voted not to change them.

   d.	Rationale for Decision:

       (1)	The Board voted to change the applicant's characterization of service to Honorable 
because the applicant's length and quality of service, to include combat service, the Board's 
compassion for the applicant's personal hardship and the length of time since the discharge 
outweighed the applicant's misconduct. Thus, the prior characterization is no longer appropriate. 

       (2)	The Board voted not to change the applicant's reason for discharge or 
accompanying SPD code as the reason the applicant was discharged was both proper and 
equitable.

       (3)	The RE code will not change, as the current code is consistent with the procedural 
and substantive requirements of the regulation.

10.	BOARD ACTION DIRECTED:

	a.	Issue a New DD-214:  Yes 

	b.	Change Characterization to:  Honorable

	c.	Change Reason / SPD Code to:  No Change

	d.	Change RE Code to:  No Change 

	e.	Change Authority to:  No Change

Authenticating Official:
 
Legend:


AWOL - Absent Without Leave
AMHRR - Army Military Human 
Resource Record
BCD - Bad Conduct Discharge
BH - Behavioral Health
CG - Company Grade Article 15
CID - Criminal Investigation 
Division
ELS - Entry Level Status
FG - Field Grade Article 15
GD - General Discharge 
HS - High School 
HD - Honorable Discharge
IADT - Initial Active Duty Training
MP - Military Police
MST - Military Sexual Trauma
N/A - Not applicable
NCO - Noncommissioned Officer
NIF - Not in File
NOS - Not Otherwise Specified
OAD - Ordered to Active Duty
OBH (I) - Other Behavioral 
Health (Issues)
OMPF - Official Military 
Personnel File
PTSD - Post-Traumatic Stress 
Disorder
RE - Re-entry
SCM - Summary Court Martial
SPCM - Special Court Martial 
SPD - Separation Program 
Designator 
TBI - Traumatic Brain Injury
UNC - Uncharacterized 
Discharge
UOTHC - Under Other Than 
Honorable Conditions
VA - Department of Veterans 
Affairs



ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE
AR20210001509
1