IN THE CASE OF:  	Ms. 
      
      BOARD DATE:  	16 October 2013

      CASE NUMBER:  	AR20130006254
___________________________________________________________________________

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.

THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND STATEMENT:

1.  The applicant requests her bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that her discharge is unfair.  She was young and very naïve at the time and she paid for her mistake drastically.  Before the incident which was the basis for her discharge, she was a good Soldier.  She worked hard and maintained good behavior.  She loved being a Soldier and would fight and die for her country right now if allowed.  She just wants her discharge to reflect her heart, honorable. 
 
DISCHARGE UNDER REVIEW INFORMATION:

a. Application Receipt Date:			29 March 2013
b. Discharge Received:			Bad Conduct Discharge
c. Date of Discharge:				4 March 2011
d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code:	  	Court-Martial, Other, AR 635-200, Chapter 3, 								JJD, RE-4
e. Unit of assignment:				HHD, 80th Ord Bn, 593rd Sus Bde, Fort Lewis,							WA
f. Current Enlistment Date/Term:		4 October 2006, 3 years and 19 weeks
g. Current Enlistment Service:		4 years, 01 month, 16 days
h. Total Service:				4 years, 01 month, 16 days
i. Time Lost:					105 days  
j. Previous Discharges:			None
k. Highest Grade Achieved:			E-1
l. Military Occupational Specialty:		92Y10, Unit Supply Specialist 
m. GT Score:					86
n. Education:					HS Graduate
o. Overseas Service:				None
p. Combat Service:				None
q. Decorations/Awards:			NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR
r. Administrative Separation Board: 		No
s. Performance Ratings:			None
t. Counseling Statements:			None
u. Prior Board Review:				No

SUMMARY OF SERVICE:		
	
The record shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 October 2006, for a period of 3 years and 19 weeks.  She was 18 years old at the time and was a high school graduate.  Her record documents no acts of valor or significant achievement.  

SEPARATION FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

1.  The record shows that on 23 February 2009, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial of the following charges:  on or about 14 February 2008, the applicant stole one wedding and one engagement ring, of a value in excess of $500.00, the property of SPC I.J.M; and on 24 July 2008, the applicant stole U.S. currency, of a value in excess of $500.00, the property of SPC A.L.S. 

2.  She was sentenced to a Bad Conduct Discharge, and confinement for 4 months.  

3.  On 8 June 2009, the applicant was released from confinement (after serving 105 days, pursuant to a pre-trial agreement).  She was placed on excess leave for 582 days (090703-110204). 

4.  On 8 January 2010, the sentence was approved except for the part extending to a bad conduct discharge.  The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of The Army for review by the Court of Military Review and on 22 April 2010.  The United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and ordered the sentence to be executed.  

5.  The applicant was separated from the Army on 4 March 2011, with a bad conduct discharge, a separation code of JJD, and a reentry code of 4.

6.  The applicant’s service record shows she had 105 days of lost time (090223-090607) as a result of her military confinement.  

EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICANT'S RECORD:

Special Court-Martial Order with allied documents, adjudged on 23 February 2009, which shows the applicant, was found guilty as described in paragraph 1 above.  Her punishment consisted of a Bad Conduct Discharge, and confinement for four months.  

EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT:

A copy of her DD Form 214; a copy of SCM Order #1, dated 8 January 2010; and SCM Order #6 dated 8 July 2010.

POST-SERVICE ACTIVITY: 

The applicant states she has worked hard to maintain good behavior.

REGULATORY AUTHORITY:

1.  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.  

2.  Because relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the ADRB to be established facts, issues relating to the applicant’s innocence of charges for which she was found guilty cannot form a basis for relief.  

3.  With respect to a discharge adjudged by a special court-martial, the action of the ADRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency.  Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed.  The ADRB does not have the jurisdictional authority to review a discharge or dismissal resulting from a general court-martial.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The applicant’s request for an upgrade of the characterization of her discharge was carefully considered.   However, after examining the applicant’s record of service, her military records, and the issues submitted with the application, there are insufficient mitigating factors to warrant clemency.  

2.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of misconduct.  The service record indicates the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and the sentence was approved by the convening authority.  Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process.  

3.  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.  

4.  The applicant contends that she 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 contends that she was a good Solder prior to the discharge incident.  The applicant’s service accomplishments and the quality of her service prior to the incidents that caused the initiation of discharge proceeding were carefully considered.  However, this service was determined not to be sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade to the characterization of discharge.  

6.  The applicant would like to fight and die for her country if she could.  However, Soldiers being processed for separation are assigned reentry codes based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  Based on AR 635-5-1 and the SPD Code/RE Code Cross Reference Table, the applicant was appropriately assigned an RE Code of 4.  An RE code of 4 cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.

7.  The records show the proper discharge and separation authority procedures were followed in this case.  

8.  In view of the foregoing, the characterization of service being both proper and equitable, recommend the Board deny clemency.

SUMMARY OF ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING:

Type of Hearing:  Records Review       Date:  16 October 2013      Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  NA 

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Board Vote:
Character Change:     0	No Change:    5
Reason Change:	NA	No Change:  NA
(Board member names available upon request)

Board Action Directed:
Issue a new DD Form 214:		No
Change Characterization to:	No Change
Change Reason to:			NA
Change Authority for Separation:	NA
Change RE Code to:		NA
Grade Restoration to:		NA
Other:					NA













Legend:
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)		AR20130006254



Page 5 of 5 pages


ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (ADRB)

CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE



1