AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD	I

I - -    -

YES	No
x

INITIAL)

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE
NAME  OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

GRADE

AB
x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A91.05

INDEX NUMBER

A68.00	r EJlW!f"l:l _NllJ,JlllRtO?f'nlilQ  P<> -	- ;,,., _
I	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

Hl':ARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

26 Jan 2006

FD-2005-00113

Case heard at Andrews AFB, MD.

Advise appl icant of the decisiort of the Board 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.

 	I 	

U'\?,,_ft,. •!i_}<__w•y_g     '->-        -.'WV'::"./ :r -	)N.Qu;,"µ•,•_-.__•_--_,-.-""•__-P•.__-:"W.._- -_.,.',ll1i:'fHth_'N_- -----:•i·-   -   ,..

•'•'	'    .·:·:·:·:·:·.·:·:···:·	i ' ,··,, •'.+.P-:w/\J'''.)\'?/

;,,_ r\l !fE: t!:ilbZOO'i<i-

-·:·;:c-';,''-'''''"''--- =	----'--------	---'J"•'""=="'--""""---ti•'dl· ---- ·:	-	-	---..-

,.i:.:.:. ···..::,,.. · ·	. ·:.::Jz d''''''='''''· :: -;' ,, - - -'-'---··'->'·:'-,: ;::·

SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE  PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 c STREET WEST, SUITE 40

1I	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR

RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD io762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00113	

GENERAL:	The applicant  appeals for upgrade  of discharge  from a bad  conduct  discharge to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.

The applicant requested a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) and was scheduled for an appearance on 26 January 2006, via video-teleconference between St. Augustine FL, and Andrews AFB, MD, but she did not keep the appointment or call to reschedule. Therefore her request for clemency was reviewed based upon the record and her submission.

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 that the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to persuade the DRB that clemency action was justified  in the applicant's case.

ISSUE:

The applicant received a Bad Conduct Discharge, a type of punitive discharge, as part of her sentence resulting from a Special Court-Martial conviction.  Her case was reviewed by the convening authority and military appellate courts and they approved the findings and sentence of the court-martial.  Under the provisions of Title 10 of the United States Code, Section 1553, the only basis for a change of a Bad Conduct discharge is clemency.  The applicant presented evidence which the DRB opined did not warrant granting clemency.  While the applicant alleges that her unit did not help her with her problems, the record does not support that contention and she provided no additional explanation of her contention.  She argued that the checks she wrote bounced due to her then-husband's actions, but the record shows that she wrote checks knowing she would not have the money in the bank to pay them.  She stated that she has received additional education since her conviction but did not provide the DRB with any evidence of the type of education she has received.  She states she has now married a new husband and has a family, but did not explain why those facts warrant granting clemency.  While the DRB was sympathetic to her situation as the wife of an irresponsible husband, that did not excuse her own intentional misconduct.  The DRB noted that she had terminated that relationship and begun a new family, but that did not justify granting clemency.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the Unites States Code and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative and legal 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