AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

x x x
x x

A94.55

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4   BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

05 Feb 2014	FD-2012-00598

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762·7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2012-00598

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to general.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE:	Applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge In Lieu of Trial by Court Martial

Although not explicitly stated, the applicant contends discharge was inequitable and believes he was unfairly treated and manipulated.  The records indicated that on 14 January 1998 the applicant's commander properly referred the applicant to trial by court-martial for violations of Articles 92 and 121 of the UCMJ.  The three specifications under Article 92 included failure to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully using his Government American Express Card for purposes other than government travel by making unauthorized
cash advances, failed to obey a lawful general regulation by using an access medium which belonged to another person, and failed to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully attempting to use an access medium which belonged to another person.  The specification under Article 121 included did at or near Osan Air Base , ROK, between on or about 8 March 1996 and 29 March 1996, wrongfully appropriate lawful currency of a value of about $3,705.50, the property of the United States Government.
On 24 February 1998, under the legal counsel, the applicant requested to be discharged IAW AFI 36-3208, Chapter 4, in lieu of trial by court-martial with the full understanding that he could receive a UOTHC discharge.  On 2 March 1998, the applicant's request was accepted by the discharge authority and the applicant was discharged with a UOTHC characterization on 23 March 1998. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief