(a) A determination reflecting a member's military behavior and performance of duty during a specific period of service. The three characterizations are:
(1) Honorable. A separation from the naval service with honor. The issuance of an Honorable Discharge is contingent upon proper military behavior and performance of duty.
(2) Under Honorable Conditions (also termed General Discharge). A separation from the naval service under honorable conditions. The issuance of a discharge under honorable conditions is contingent upon military behavior and performance of duty which is not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an Honorable Discharge.
(3) Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (formerly termed Undesirable Discharge). A separation from the naval service under conditions other than honorable. It is issued to terminate the service of a member of the naval service for one or more of the reasons/basis listed in the Naval Military Personnel Manual, Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual and their predecessor publications.
(4) Entry Level Separation. (i) A separation initiated while a member is in entry level status will be described as an Entry Level Separation except in the following circumstances:
(a) When characterization under Other Than Honorable Conditions is authorized and is warranted by the circumstances of the case; or
(b) When characterization of service as Honorable is clearly warranted by the presence of unusual circumstances including personal conduct and performance of naval duty and is approved on a case-by-case basis by the Secretary of the Navy. This characterization will be considered when the member is separated by reason of Selected Changes in Service Obligation, Convenience of the Government, or Disability.
(ii) With respect to administrative matters outside the administrative separation system that require a characterization of service as Honorable or General, an Entry Level Separation shall be treated as the required characterization. An Entry Level Separation for a member of a Reserve component separated from the Delayed Entry Program is under honorable conditions.
(b) [Reserved]
[50 FR 10943, Mar. 19, 1985, as amended at 51 FR 44909, Dec. 15, 1986; 65 FR 62616, Oct. 19, 2000]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case:
Vince v. Mabus, 956 F. Supp. 2d 83 (D.D.C. 2013).
Vince v. Mabus, 956 F. Supp. 2d 83 (D.D.C. 2013).
· cites it 4× “32 C.F.R. § 724.109 . An "Honorable” discharge is "contingent upon proper military behavior and performance of duty.”
Syneeda Lynn Penland v. Raymond Edwin Mabus, Jr., 78 F. Supp. 3d 484 (D.D.C. 2015).
· cites it 2× “32 C.F.R. § 724.109 (a). A discharge "Under Honorable Conditions” is "contingent upon military behavior and performance of duty which is not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an Honorable Discharge.”
Kelly v. United States, 69 F.4th 887 (Fed. Cir. 2023).
“32 C.F.R. § 724.109 . A discharge “Under Honorable Conditions (also termed General)” is “contingent upon military behavior and performance of duty which is not sufficiently meritori- ous to warrant an Honorable Discharge.”
Kalista v. Sec'y of the Navy, 560 F. Supp. 608 (D. Colo. 1983).
“See, 32 C.F.R. 724.109 lists only three discharge characterizations: (1) honorable, (2) under honorable conditions (also termed general discharge) and (3) under other than honorable conditions (formerly termed undesirable discharge).”
Millhouse v. Del Toro (D.D.C. 2025).
· cites it 3× “32 C.F.R. § 724.109 (a). An “Honorable” characterization is “[a] separation from the naval service with honor,” id.”
Kelly v. United States (Fed. Cir. 2023).
“32 C.F.R. § 724.109 . A discharge “Under Honorable Conditions (also termed General)” is “contingent upon military behavior and performance of duty which is not sufficiently meritori- ous to warrant an Honorable Discharge.”
McGough v. United States (D.D.C. 2025).
“32 C.F.R. § 724.109 (a). A former servicemember’s discharge characterization affects, among other things, eligibility for healthcare, disability, and retirement benefits.”
Boylan v. Matejka (Ill. App. Ct. 2002).
“) 32 C.F.R. §724.109 (a) (2002). We conclude that section 40 of the Act is clear and unambiguous.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.