AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X	RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

ISSUES

AOI.39

INDEX NUMBER

A67.03

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

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

DENY
x x x x
x

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HEARING

HEARING DAT£	CASE NUMBER

27 Feb 2014	FD-2013-00722

-	-	.. . - ,..  .. -·.. . .  ..,..       .....

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.

,.
I	I	--	. -	.--··--·--: .·-- -'.

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OPTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
l!JSCOMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AF11,MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00722	

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

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 a General discharge Misconduct - Commission of a Serious Offense

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because she did not have adequate counsel. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for conspiring with three other individuals to evade the provisions of the United States immigration laws. After a complete and thorough review of the records and the evidence submitted by the applicant the Board found the applicant's contention to have no merit. The records indicated the applicant was properly notified of her commander's recommendation to discharge her on 22 February 2011. Additionally, on the same day the applicant consulted with counsel and waived her right to make a statement. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions she made in her Air Force career. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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.

Inview 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.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief