Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/01	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and attached documents submitted by the applicant. 

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030530   Chapter: 3       AR: 635-200
Reason: Court-Martial, Other	   RE:     SPD: JJD   Unit/Location: HHC, 307th Signal Bn, APO AP 

Time Lost: Military confinement, for 146 days (990331-990824)

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 000322, while assigned to HHC, 307th Signal Bn, APO AE, she was found guilty of theft of military property, personal property, AAFES merchandise and forgery; forfeiture of $639.00 pay per month for six months, confinement for six months and a bad conduct discharge.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  17
Current ENL Date: 970806    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	05 Yrs, 04Mos, 28Days includes 1351 days of excess leave
Total Service:  		05 Yrs, 04Mos, 28Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-1		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 74C10/Rec Telecommunication Center Operator   GT: 108   EDU: HS GRAD   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  ?????
Post Service Accomplishments: The applicant states that she has earned a degree in Psychology with a minor in Sociology (no documentation provided). 












VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 22 March 2000, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial of stealing money, property and writing bad checks .  She was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, confinement for five months and 15 days, forfeiture of $639.00 pay per month for four months, and reduction to E-1.  On 22 March 2000, the sentence was approved.  The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of The Army for review by the Court of Military Review.  On 10 August 2001, The United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence.  On 6 March 2003, the sentence having been affirmed pursuant to Article 71c having been complied with, the sentence was ordered to be executed.

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
             Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 3, Section IV,  establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.
       

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
        After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would warrant clemency.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of misconduct.  The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and that the sentence was approved by the convening authority.  Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process.  The analyst is empowered to recommend a change to the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate.  Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed.  The analyst noted the applicant's issue and determined that she was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 3, AR 635-200, by reason of a court-martial with a Bad Conduct Discharge.  The narrative reason for separation is governed by specific directives.  The applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 3, AR 635-200.  The narrative reason specified by Army Regulations for a discharge under this paragraph is "Court-Martial, Other” and the separation code is "JJD."  Army Regulation 635-5, Separation Documents, governs preparation of the DD Form 214 and dictates that entry of the narrative reason for separation, entered in block 28 and separation code, entered in block 26 of the form, will be entered exactly as listed in tables 2-2 or 2-3 of AR 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator (SPD) Codes.  The regulation further stipulates that no deviation is authorized.  There is no provision for any other reason to be entered under this regulation.  Furthermore, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted her accomplishments outlined with the application.  However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted.  Further, the Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of gaining employment or enhancing employment opportunities.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommend to the Board to deny clemency.  
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 8 January 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board found no cause for clemency and therefore voted to deny relief.
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 0
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090005568
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages