AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAl\.f E OF SERVICE !\'IEMRER tr A  T vu.,..,,..... '--- -	ITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE VOTH	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZA TlON

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

ISSUES	A94.05	M.7"T.J7

HON

GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

l	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
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

09 Mar 2005

FD-2004-00417

Case heard at 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.

'

TO:

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, lRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE  -+-	--	--
FD-2004-00417

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance  before the Discharge Review Board but declined to exercise this right.

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

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant requested an Under-other-than Honorable Discharge in Lieu of Court Martial. On 27 August 2001, charges were preferred on the applicant including one charge with four specifications for bad checks in violation of Article 123a, UCMJ, and one charge and specification for failure to pay a debt in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The applicant was charged with making, drawing, or uttering checks without sufficient funds in the amount of $6147.74 and failure to pay a just debt involving her government travel card in the amount of $3073.55.   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.

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