Application Receipt Date: 061006	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
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?  
Yes    No        Tender Offer:        

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge:    Date: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 970905   
Chapter: 3-13    AR: 600-8-24
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial 
RE:     SPD: NA
Unit/Location: HHC, Theater Support Brigade, Fort Clayton, Panama 

Time Lost: None

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

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier's Overall Record
DOB:  621005  
Current ENL Date: 850724    Current ENL Term: Indef Years  Item 12a on the applicant's DD Form 214, date entered active duty this period is incorrect, should read (850724), see appointment letter.
Current ENL Service: 12 Yrs, 03Mos, 12Days      
Total Service:  12 Yrs, 06 Mos, 18 Days      
Previous Discharges: USAR-850418-850723/NA
Highest Grade: 0-4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 35D Tactical Intel   GT: NA   EDU: College Grad   Overseas: Germany   Combat: Saudi Arabia/Kuwait (NIF) 
Decorations/Awards: MSM, ARCOM-3, JSAM, AAM-2, ARCAM, NDSM, SWASM W/ 3 BSS, ASR, OSR-2, KLM -SA, KLM-KU, EIB, RNGR TAB 
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that the applicant was charged on 21 August 1997, with intent to deceive, submitted a written statement to the U.S. Army South Claims Office in an attempt to receive an additional $2,000.00 in claim compensation, which statement was false (970224), stole U.S. currency, of a value of more than $100.00, the property of the U.S. Government (970130), presented a voucher to a claims officer for approval in the amount of $4,000.00, which was false and fraudulent (970106), presented a voucher to a claims officer for approval in the amount of $4,600.00, which was false and fraudulent in the amont of $3,000.00, in that the value of the rug was approximately $1,600.00, and then known by the applicant to be false and fraudulent (970106).  On 27 August 1997, the applicant voluntarily tendered his resignation in lieu of trial by a General Court-Martial under the provisions of AR 600-8-24, Chapter 3-13.  The applicant was advised of his rights and understood that if his resignation was accepted, he could receive any type of discharge as determined by Headquarters DA.  The applicant's intermediate and senior cammanders recommended that his resignation request in accordance with AR 600-8-24, Chapter 3, paragraph 3-13 be approved with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.   On 5 September 1997, the Commander, United States Army South, Fort Clayton, Panama, recommended approval of the applicant's resignation in accordance with AR 600-8-24, Chapter 3, paragraph 3-13 be approved with characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The Ad Hoc Review Board met.  On 9 October 1997, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards), accepted the applicant's resignation, approved the recommendation of the Army Ad Hoc Review Board, and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.
      
      The analyst noted that the applicants DD Form 214, item 24 shows a characterization of service of honorable.  However, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  It appears that someone in the separation process made an administrative error when the applicant's DD Form 214 was being processed.  

      b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
      Army regulation 600-8-24 prescribes the policies and procedures governing the transfer and discharge of Army officer personnel.  Chapter 3, Paragraph 3-13 outlines the rules for processing requests for resignation for the good of the service in lieu of trial by a general court-martial.

      c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
      After a careful review of all the applicant's military records during the term of service under review, the issues and documents he submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit a change to the applicant's narrative reason for discharge and recommends that relief be denied. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a punitive discharge.  The applicant voluntarily requested resignation in lieu of trial by General Court-Martial under the provisions of Chapter 3, AR 600-8-24.  The appropriate authority approved the applicant's request and issuance of a under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Furthermore, the analyst noted that the applicants DD Form 214, item 24 shows a characterization of service of honorable.  However, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  It appears that someone in the separation process made an administrative error when the applicant's DD Form 214 was being procesed.  Additionally, the analyst found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious actions by the command, and was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the narrative reason for discharge remains both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 18 December 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  Board Decision
The discharge was:			Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The characterization of service was:   Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The narrative reasons were: 	       	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

DRB voting record:  		      Change 0    No change 0   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - Reason
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  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 narrative reason for discharge was both proper and equitable, and voted not to change it.

Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 

CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 19 December 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060014174

Applicant Name:   .      
______________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 6 pages