Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 208/10/01 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: 080606 Chapter: 3 AR: 635-200 Reason: Court-Martial, Other RE: SPD: JJD Unit/Location: 34th Military Police Det, LEC, Fort Knox, KY Time Lost: AWOL x 2 for 107 days (060307-060404), and (060406-060624), surrendered. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 060911, SPCM, AWOL x 2 (060307-060405), and (060406-060625); forfeiture of $750 x 4 and discharged with a bad-conduct discharge. Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 28 Current ENL Date: 050404 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 10Mos, 14Days ????? Total Service: 06 Yrs, 01Mos, 18Days includes 632 days of excess leave (060914-080606) Previous Discharges: ARNG-990121-990420/NA ADT-990421-990624/UNC ARNG-040121-040314/NA IADT-040315-040813/UNC ARNG-040814-050403/HD Highest Grade: E-2 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 31B10 Military Police GT: 100 EDU: GED Cert Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM, ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: Sidney, 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 11 September 2006, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial of AWOL x 2 (060307-060405), and (060406-060625). He was sentenced to forfeiture of $750 x 4 and bad- conduct discharge. On 9 June 2003, 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 1 March 2007, The United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence. On 25 June 2007, The United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence. On 12 December, 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 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 and determined that the applicant had many legitimate avenues through which to obtain assistance or relief, without committing the misconduct, which led to the separation action under review. Further, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.” An RE code of “4” cannot be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment. In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that the characterization of service, reason for discharge to include the reentry elgibility (RE) code was both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 23 July 2009 Location: Washington, DC 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 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 AR20080015276 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages