AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
X PERSONAL APPEARANCE	-

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE J N"ITIAL)	GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
w nu1w•

RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEi.

AMERICAN  LEGION

MEMBERS  SITTING	HON

VOTE OF THE BOARD

UOTHC
x x x

OTHER

DENY

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

EXlllBITS SU

A94.06	A67.90

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER or NOTIFJCA TlON

HEARING DATE
30 Jan 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0289

4		BRJH' OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE l'O THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING Or PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHl:O AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REV!CW BOARD DECISIONAL RATlONALE.

REMARKS
Case beard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

FROM:

(EF-V2)

DATE: 30 Jan 03

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCllARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762·7002
Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD02-0289	

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Andrews AFB, MD on January 30, 2003. Ms	, the applicant's mother also testified on the applicant's behalf.
The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5:  Applicant's contentions
Exhibit 6: Character Letters from applicant's nursing school
Exhibit 7:  College transcript Exhibit 8:  Copy of AFI 36-3208

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge to Honorable is denied. However, the Board grants an upgrade of discharge to General.

The board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.  However, after a thorough review of the record, the Board finds that the applicant's character of discharge is inequitable.

ISSUE:  The applicant states that her discharge was inequitable because under today's standards, she would not have received an UOTHC discharge.  She quoted AFI 36-3208, paragraph  1.21.3, which states that a discharge UOTHC should not ensue if the sole basis for discharge is a serious offense that resulted in conviction by a court-martial that did not adjudge a punitive discharge unless such characterization is approved by the Secretary of the Air Force.  The records indicate the applicant was found guilty by a  Special Court Martial for Fraud.  She also received an Article 15 for theft from the Exchange.  After a
thorough and complete consideration of the information submitted by the applicant, the applicant's compelling personal testimony, and information contained in the record, the Board concluded there was sufficient mitigation and extenuation to substantiate upgrade of the discharge.  While the DRB did not condone the applicant's theft and forgery charges, they did feel it would have been more equitable to give her a General discharge.

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.	
However, in view of the foregoing findings the Board also concludes that the overall quality of the applicant's service is more accurately reflected by a General discharge. Therefore, the applicant's characterization for discharge should be changed to General.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief