----	-- ---·-------- 	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

HEARING DATE
2016-12-05

CASE NUMBER FD-2014- 00246

TYPE

x	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	NON-PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

'COUNSEL
Yes	No

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES
A39.00

INDEX NUMBER
A94.53

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	j

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 HEARJNG
APPLICANT'S ISSUE '\ND THE BOJ\RI)'S DECIS!ON,AL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE AITACHED 'i\JR FORCE DISCHARG!l REVIEW BORD ,DE<:;I§IONIµ, Rt,\pC>NALE:   ·     ·;
Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of  he decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB; MD 20762-7001

AFHQ FORM  0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00246	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to General.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), via video teleconference between Joint Base Andrews, MD and Robins AFB, GA on 5 December 2016.

No additional exhibits were submitted and no witnesses were present at the hearing.

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

FINDING: The Board finds insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge.

DISCUSSION: 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 characterization 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 completed 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 received a Bad Conduct Discharge, a punitive discharge, as part of the sentence resulting from a Special Court-Martial conviction. Under the provisions of Title10, United States Code, Section 1553, the only basis for a change of a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) is clemency.

The applicant explains she was placed in a precarious position by her mother prior to her Permanent Change of Station (PCS) to Osan AB, Korea. As a result, the applicant committed Basic Allowance Housing (BAH) fraud. She falsified official documentation stating she relocated her children in order to receive a higher rate BAH. Although the applicant later self-reported the violation, she was court-martialed and found guilty. The applicant contends she has learned from her mistakes and has lived with the stigma of her BCD; therefore, she requested an upgrade.

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

The Discharge Review Board concluded that the applicant’s punitive discharge by Special Court-Martial is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case and there is insufficient basis, as an act of clemency, for change of discharge.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief