AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

N.HIE OF SERVICE MEi\IBER !LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

-GRADE	:\FSN/SSAN

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

X PERSONAL APPEARANCE	RECORD REVIEW

COllNSEL	NAME OF COllNSEL ANIJ OR ORGANIZATION

APPR! ss AND OR OR<;ANIZATIO/\i OF COl1 NSEL

n:s	NO

.   IHI H I L & a

MEMBERS SITTING

HON	GEN

VOTE OF THE llOARD

llOTllC

OTIU:R	Dt:NY
x

COL 
·--------------
COL ---------·
LTCOL 

LTCOL 
-·------------
MSGT 

---------------+------+-----+-----,..--i--·---  --------···-·---
x
f	----------------+-----+-------ir-----r-----rx----
x
----------------+-------+-----+----+-----"+-x---	,

ISSl'ES

INDl:X NllMBICR

EXllllUTS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD

A92.36, A92.02, A 92.22,A 94.54

A67.30	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCI IARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING (),\Tl'.
17 A.PR 03

CASE NllMBER
FD2002-0258

4		BRIEi' OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIHllS SUHMITTED AT  TIMI·: OF PERSONAL APPEAR ANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL Al'l'ERANCE  HFARINCi
Arruc ANrs ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DfflSlONAl- RATIONA-----·---'-
RHL\RKS
Case heard at Andrews AFB, MD.	I

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

INl>ORSEMENT	DATE:  17 APR 03
TO:	fROM:

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH Arn_ TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNl-1. COUNCIL
AIR !'ORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING_ 3RL> FLOOR ANDREWS  AFR   MD 20762-7002

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

Al	FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE Nl'!\IBER

FD2002-0258	

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

The applicant appeared and testified bef ischarge Review Board (ORB), with counsel, at And rews
AFB, MD on April 17, 2003. Her frien was present to testify on her behalf.

The attached brief contai ns available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS:   Upgrade of discharge is denied.
The Board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSU ES: The appl icant was discharged with a General Discharge for m isconduct, Pattern of Miscond uct and Commission of a Serious Offense. The records indicated the applicant was convicted by court martial of conspiring to make and sign a false official document and  signing official documents with intent to deceive for the purpose of fraudulentl y obtaining Basic Allowance for Quarters and Variable Housi ng Allowance at the with-dependent rate, and dereliction of duty for failing to report changes in her mother's status as req ui red.
The applicant argues that this offense was an isolated incident in an otherwise good career, that the positive aspects of her service outweighed the negative, that her discharge was too harsh since she had already been severely punished for this misconduct, that medical problems impaired her ability to serve resulti ng i n an approved medical discharge that was unfai rly denied her and that her commander created a hosti le work environment.
Evidence of the record shows that the applicant filed multiple false documents claiming dependency of her mother.  The applicant's commander acted within his authority to recommend administrative discharge.
The fact that the court-martial chose not to impose a punitive discharge did not precl ude administrative discharge solely based on the cond uct which resulted in conviction.  Further, she was not improperly denied a medical discharge and the applicant's commander did not deny her the previousl y recommended disabi lity discharge.  Since there existed two bases for discharge, her case was properly reviewed as a dual action by the Air Force Personnel Board who recommended that she should be discharged administratively with a general characterization of service.  The Discharge Review Board considered evidence and testimony
regardi ng the circumstances surrounding the applicant's offenses as well as evidence confirming her excellent duty performance and community service while on active duty and opined that her  characterization of d ischarge as general vice under other than honorable conditions took these factors into account.  Her impressive post service accomplishments and community service reflect favorably on her and supported evidence of her overall excellent conduct while on active duty but did not alter the facts or  serious nature of her offenses.

CONCLUSIONS:	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 that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

I n view of the foregoing findings the board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge or change of reason for discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Exami ner's Brief