AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

SSGT

RECORD REVIE

A	I ' I :  • 1..            •  I I t.   I	I 11.:

HON

GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

X*+ X*+ X*+
X*+

A92.35 A92.21 A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90 A61.00

1 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

X*+

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

16 Dec 2010	FD-2009-00083

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision 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.

*Reason and Authority
+Reenlistment Code

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, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-00083	

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 ap	testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel from The American Legio  at Andrews AFB on 16 December 2010.
The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5: The American Legion Statement
Exhibit 6: Police Report
Exhibit 7: Law Office Memorandum Exhibit 8: Memorandum
Exhibit 9: Police Report on Incident Exhibit  10: Letter of Reprimand Exhibit 11: Character Letter
Exhibit 12: Memorandum Regarding Paid Debt Exhibit 13: AF Training Certificate
Exhibit 14: AF Performance Reports
Exhibit 15: Associate and Bachelor's Degrees Exhibit 16: College Transcrpts
Exhibit  17: Personal Statement

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

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge, change ofreason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code.

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:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and based on an isolated incident.  The records indicated the applicant was administratively disciplined for issuing bad checks which led to a military and civilian investigation, being arrested for obstruction of justice, delinquent on GTC account and for being arrested at Walmart for shoplifting in which she was placed on probation for five years by a civilian court.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her negative behavior.  The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct \\ as a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2.  Applicant states that her discharge did not take into account the good things she did wh ile in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by her performance reports, letters ofrecommendation and other accomplishments.   They found the seriousness of the willful  misconduct	
offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the disch<irt'.e was
appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.	

Issue 3.  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.

CONCLUSION:   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 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief