AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD BEARING RECORD

NAM E OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INlTIAL)

GRADE

AFSNISSAN

X	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORCANl.l.ATION or COUNSEL
(b) (6)

. ..

"7_:,-...--.,.,- - .,--. -	....	·	- --- : -.. .···r1:i-c
• • •••    ..	•	1'   ...	· ..!'  .  •   ..,,   .

HON

OEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

X*+

X*+

ISSUtS

AOl.01
A94.SS

IND£X NUMBER

A47.00

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
ADDITION AL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llEARINC DATE	CASI!. NUMBER

01May 2014	FD-20 14-00039

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.
*Narrative Reason
+RE Code

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

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONN£L COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVlf;W IOARD
ISl5 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD n.()()R ANDREWS AR,MD 20761·7t01

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

CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2014-00039

GENERAL:   The applicant  appeals for upgrade  of discharge to honorable  and to change the reason  and authority for the discharge.

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 and change ofreason and authority for discharge ISSUE:   Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct-Serious Offense
The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by the applicant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant's record of service included one Letter of Reprimand for lying about financial debts on pre-service commissioning  documents.

Applicant submitted issues regarding both the inequity and impropriety of her discharge.  Applicant's counsel submitted statements that actions taken against his client were premature and inappropriate. Counsel states that the commander refused to believe that the applicant was telling the truth and that it showed lack of respect for applicant as an officer and a failure to fully review the matter prior to making
such a life changing decision.   The records show that applicant's discharge package was carefully reviewed by the Secretary of the Air Force, Personnel Council and a decision was made for discharge based on documents submitted by applicant and her commander. The respondent requested her response to this discharge action be delayed until 24 October 2007, after her bankruptcy case was finalized because she wished to use the bankruptcy proceeding to contest the validity of her debts.  She was granted two extensions but her request to delay the matter to late October was denied. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. 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.

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.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief