Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2009/02/18	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 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: 	NIF   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050513   Chapter: 3    AR: 635-200
Reason: Court-Martial, Other	   RE:     SPD: JJD   Unit/Location: HHC, 122nd Signal Bn, APO AP 96258-0289 

Time Lost: Confinement /Military Authorities (030115-030327) for 72 days. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 020422, with intent to deceive, make a false official statement to a 1SG (020410); forfeiture of $426 pay (suspended), and extra duty for 14 days (CG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): NIF

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  34
Current ENL Date: 020228    Current ENL Term: 02 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 00Mos, 05Days ?????
Total Service:  		08 Yrs, 01Mos, 08Days Includes 778 days of excess leave (030328-050513)
Previous Discharges: 	RA-970124-000215/HD
                                       RA-000216-020227/HD
Highest Grade: E-5		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 75B20 Unit Admin Spec   GT: NIF   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AGCM, NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  St. Albans, NY
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 15 January 2003, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial.  The applicant was sentenced to a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for three (3) months, and reduction to E-1.  The documentation approving the sentence and The United States Army Court of Military Review affirming the approved findings of guilty and the sentence, these documents are not part of the available record and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the process.  On 21 November 2003, the sentence having been affirmed pursuant to Article 71c having been complied with, the sentence was ordered to be  executed.  However, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214, (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), which was not authenticated by the applicant's signature.  The DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 3, by reason of a court martial, other, with a bad conduct discharge.  Furthermore, the DD Form 214 shows a Separation Code of JJD (i.e., court martial, other), with a reentry eligibility (RE) code of "4."  
       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 during the period of enlistment under review and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would warrant clemency.  The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was adjudged guilty by 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 Board is empowered to change 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.  After a thorough review of the applicant’s record and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no cause for clemency and recommends to the Board no clemency.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the issues that the applicant submitted are not a matter on which the Army Discharge Review Board grants a change in discharge because it raises no matter of fact, law, procedure, or discretion relating to the discharge process nor is it associated with the discharge at the time of issuance.  Further, the analyst acknowledges the applicant's successful transition to civilian life and noted the accomplishments outlined with the application.  Also, the analyst considered the applicant’s quality of service during the initial portion of the enlistment under review; however, this service was determined not to be sufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of service.  Finally, the analyst determined that the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) does not contain all the specific documents that would indicate the reason for the separation action from the United States Army.  If the applicant desires to appear before a personal appearance Board, the burden of proof remains with the former Soldier to provide the appropriate documents or other evidence sufficient to explain the facts, circumstances, and reasons underlying the separation action, for the Board’s consideration.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable.    

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 18 November 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
fter 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 5
(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: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090006407
______________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 3 pages