Applicant Name: ????? Application Receipt Date: 2009/08/27 Prior Review: Prior Review Date: NA I. Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: The applicant states, in effect, that he received a document stating that his court-martial had been reviewed and was found to be a "honorable" discharge. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. 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: NA Discharge Received: Date: 031114 Chapter: 3, Section IV AR: 635-200 Reason: Court-Martial RE: SPD: JJD Unit/Location: HQ & HQ Troop, 2nd Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, Fort Irwin, CA Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): Special Court-Martial; adjudged on 991214, for attempting to commit an indecent act upon a child under the age of 16 years, on or about 991009, committing an indecent act upon a child under the age of 16 years, on or about 991009. He was sentenced to reduction to Private (E-1), forfeiture of $600.00 pay per month for six months, to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge, perform hard labor without confinement for 60 days, restriction for 60 days and to be confined for 60 days. The military judge further recommended that the convening authority suspend the period of confinement for six months. Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record Age at current enlistment: 18 Current ENL Date: 980618 Current ENL Term: 3 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 5 Yrs, 4 Mos, 27 Days The computation includes 1,262 days of excess leave from (000601-031114). Total Service: 5 Yrs, 4 Mos, 27 Days ????? Previous Discharges: None Highest Grade: E-3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 11C10 Indirect Fire Infantryman GT: NIF EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity City, State: ????? Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the applicant. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 14 December 1999, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial for attempting to commit an indecent act upon a child under the age of 16 years, on or about 991009, committing an indecent act upon a child under the age of 16 years, on or about 991009. He was sentenced to reduction to Private (E-1), forfeiture of $600.00 pay per month for six months, to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge, perform hard labor without confinement for 60 days, restriction for 60 days and to be confined for 60 days. The military judge further recommended that the convening authority suspend the period of confinement for six months. On 10 March 2000, only so much of 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. 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 to be discharged with a bad conduct discharge 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 special 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 appropr The analyst noted the applicant's issue that he received a document stating that his court-martial had been review and was found to be honorable. The document which is generated when a Soldier successfully completes his statutory obligation; the applicant alludes to, appears to have been erroneously generated from the DA, US Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, MO, and appears to be invalid on its face and was not authenticated by the officiary's signature. The US Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge. Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. The Defense Discharge Review Standards specifically state that no factors should be established that requires automatic change or denial of a change in discharge. After a thorough review of the applicant’s record and the issue and document submitted with the application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommends to the Board to deny clemency. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 9 July 2010 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted a copy of an Order, which appears to be erroneously generated from the DA, US Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, MO, showing the type of discharge from the US Army Reserve as honorable, with an effective date: 12 July 2005, which was not authenticated by the officiary's signature. 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 determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and 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: No Change RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: No Change Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge GD General Discharge NIF Not in the file SPCM Special Court Martial CG Company Grade Article 15 HD Honorable Discharge OAD Ordered to Active Duty UNC Uncharacterized Discharge DD Dishonorable Discharge HS High School Graduate OMPF Official Military Personnel File UOTH Under Other Than Honorable FG Field Grade Article 15 IADT Initial Active Duty Training RE Reentry Code Conditions ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20090014874 ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 3 pages