AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEJ\.IBER (LAST, FIRST ;\llDDLE INITIAL)
r:--------------------------------- ·•:
'	'

GR.\DE

AlC

·

AFSN/SSAN
-----------------.
'·-----------------·'

TI'PE UOTH

'	'
I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

,		c  ollN"S'-llL-'---'t NA E OF COU:>!SEL AND OR ORGANIZATION Y[S	o
x

ADDRESS AD OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF TUE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

x x x
x
x

SSLTS	A94.53

INDEX NUMBER

A75.00

.>	·•· EXlimITS SUBMITTED TOTHE BOARD
1	ORDER ..\PPONTING THE BOARD
2	.N>PLICA TIO"! FOR  REVIE\V OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER  OF NOTIFICATIO"I
4	BRIEF OF PERSONN EL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSO:-.!AL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE N l"l'•IB[R

05 Jun 2006	FD-2005-00415
.	T'S ISSlJE AND THE BOARD'S DECISION41.'.RATIONALA!!E DISCUSSED ON;t:I!$ ATTACHlliMJ$-l'OllCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RAU0tiA1£

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.

Upgrade of RE Code, and Reason and Authority are also denied.

,_s q J'-';!	!>-E- - - - - - - -	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ j  <!,!>_F_ <?z-".,S!	- _--:::2 _ - - - -- - ...- -- - --

:

:	y
':- --- --------------=----_-- .....-/----_---....=rn>wiiiii?C?·---:cemz - - - -	--------------·-----·-------"'A"r":-----..._- --------

.e-	-- ·1
TO:	FROl:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40 RANDOLPH  AFB. TX 78150-4742

- .	-::. •.;&'t·,·.L•·	VA'J'.E: 6.	•·:-•·'

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NVMBER

FD-2005-00415	

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) 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,  change  of  reason  and  authority   for  discharge,   and  change  of reenlistment code are 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 received a UOTHC Discharge - Discharge in Lieu of Court Martial

Applicant contends she wishes to apply for and obtain veteran status and benefits for herself and her family and is considering reenlisting in the Air Force or Air Force Reserves before reaching the age of 28.
Although the Board was sympathetic as to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, these are not matters of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade of her discharge.  The DRB noted the applicant signed a statement requesting discharge in lieu of court-martial for making and uttering  39 worthless checks totaling approximately $2,500.  In the applicant's signed statement, she acknowledged she had consulted and received legal counsel, she could be discharged under other than honorable
conditions, she was aware of the adverse nature of such a discharge and the possible consequences thereof, and it could deprive her of her veteran's benefits.  The Board found no inequity or impropriety in her discharge and concluded the willful misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and found the willful 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, reason and authority for the discharge, and reenlistment code should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief