x

x

x

x

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
.......
GRADE

,..-
AFSN/SSAN

---i

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, F1RST MIDDLE INITIAL)

AlC

RECORD REVIEW

OR  ORGANIZATION

_   I I '

_   ..  1  1 	

1     _   ..

-

1 ..  1	I

"' SEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTIIC

OTHER

DENY

x

ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TIIE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE	
HEARING DATE

07 Dec 2003	CASE NUMBER

FD-2003-00472			
		
Case heard at Randolph AFB, Texas.

Advise applicant of the 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 20762-7002	

•

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2003-004 72	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and to change the reenlistment code.	
The applicant appeared before the DRB at Randolph AFB, Texas, and was represented by Mr. from the Texas Veterans Commission.
'·
The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: Upgrade of Discharge and change ofreenlistment code is denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 and a Letter of Reprimand for significant financial irresponsibility. She wrote approximately $10,000  worth of bad checks in less than one year. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. Applicant states that her discharge did not take into account the good things she di9 while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by her performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments. They found the seriousness of the misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job. However, no inequity or impropriety in her discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing. The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized her term of service.

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.

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

Attachment: Examiner's Brief	

j

.,