1 

1 

I 

I 

1 

I 
1  NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST. I'IRST  MIDDLE INITIAL) 
.-----------------------------. 
~m i 
'TYPE  UOTH 

PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

A l C  

-..-....-....-.. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I  

X 

RECORD REVIEW 

YhS 

Co"@$  ' 
No 
X 

I 

NAME OF COIJNSEI. AND OH ORGANIZATION 

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANILATIOW OF COUNSEL 

I 

MEMBER SITTING 

I 

1 

VOTE QR THE BOARD 

HON 

I 

GEN 

I 

-+-. 

IJOTHC 

I 

" 

" 

O l l l H t  

- 

I 

DENY 

nor .oo 

I 

i 

IIEARINC DATE 

1 
1  29 Mar 2007 

1  CASE NIIMBER 
1  FD-2006-00436 

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 
APPI,ICATION  FOR WVIEW OF DISCHARGE 

1 
2 
3  1  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 
4 

BRIEF OF PERSONNEI.  F1I.E 
COIJNSEL'S Rtl.EASt '1'0  'f1II:  DOARD 

I 

I  TAPE RFCOKDINC; 01' PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE 

1

I 

1

 

APP1.ICANT'S  ISSUE AND 7HF BOARD'S DECISIONAI  RATIONAL A&  DISCUSSED ON lTlE ATTACHED  91R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIOKAL RATIONALE 

Case heard  in Washington, D.C. 

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance withlwithout  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. 

550 C S'KCET WEST, SIIT'l'k 40 

SECRETARY OF 'THE AIK  FOKCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL 
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 
I535 COMMAND DR.  EE WINC. 3RD F1.OOR 
ANDREWS ARB, MD 20762-7002 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 

(EF-V2) 

Previous edition will  be used 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

CASE NllMBER 

FD-2006-00436 

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

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance before the Discharge Review Board (LIRB) but decli~~cd 
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 that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicailt substantiates an 
inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. 

ISSUE: 

The applicant stated she was told her discharge could be upgraded in six months.  While a discharge may be 
upgraded, the upgrade is by no means automatic.  ?'he records indicate the applicant requested a discharge in 
lieu of a court-martial.  She admitted to theft of a cellular phone and making a false official statement by 
altering a sick quarter's  slip.  A discharge is upgraded  only if the applicant and the DRR  can establish an 
inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  In this case, none was found, so the Board 
denied the appeal. 

CONCLUSIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludes that thc 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 Roard 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 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 

ANDREWS AFB,  MD 

(Former A1C)  (HGH  A1C) 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl rec'd a UOTHC Disch fr USAF Lackland AFB, TX on  21 
Feb 03 UP AFI 36-3208, Chapter 4 (Triable by Court Martial).  Appeals for 
Honorable Discharge. 

2.  BACKGROUND: 

a. DOB: 5 Nov 83.  Enlmt Age: 17 5/12.  Disch Age: 19 3/12. Educ: HS DIPL. 
AFQT: N/A.  A-83,  E-62,  G-74,  M-59. PAFSC: 3P031 -  Security Police Apprentice. 
DAS: 27 Dec 01. 

b.  Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 9 Apr 01 -  12 Jun 01 (2 months 4 days) (Inactive). 

3.  SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: 

a.  Enlisted as AB 13 Jun 01 for 6 yrs. Svd: 01 Yrs 08 Mo 09 Das, all AMS. 

b .   Grade Status:  A1C -  27 Jul 01 

c.  Time Lost:  None. 

d.  Art 15's:  None. 

e ,   Additional:  (Examiner's Note: Individual received three LORs, dated 

17 Dec 02; 16 Nov 02; and 15 Jul 02.  However, these 
documents are missing from the file.  They are mentioned 
in the Legal Review, but no specifics were listed.) 

f .   CM:  None. 

g.  Record of SV: None. 

h.  Awards &  Decs:  NDSM, AFOUA W/2 OLCS. 

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS:  (01) Yrs  (10) Mos  (13) Das 
TAMS: (01) Yrs  (08) Mos  (09) Das 

4.  BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Fm 293) dtd 20 Oct 06. 

(Change Discharge to Honorable) 

Issue 1:  I was advised that after six months of being discharged from the 

Air Force I could request my discharge be upgraded to at least honorable, 
because my discharge was not dishonorable and no prior infractions within my 
term o f   service. 

ATCH 
None. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR  FORCE 

86TFI AIRLIFT WING (UWE) 

MEMORANDUM FOR 86 AWICC 

FROM:  569 USFPSICC 

1. I recommend that the attached request for discharge be approved for the following reasons: 

, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .  

a.  AlC: L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - m  

:is charged with one specification of larceny 

,..-.. .-..-.-..-.- 

and one specification 

Y 

* 

of fornerv,  On or about 3 December 2002. AlC!---------- !stole ZP-4: 
telephone, which has a value of less than $500.  In her own words, under rights advisement, she 
admitted to the theft.  On or about 14 December 2002, AlC;---------- 
statement when she presented SSgt i ------------------- 5vith an Individual Sick Slip, which she had 
admitted altering, indicating that Captl- ----- ----- ----- --- -- -- i,  MD, had put her on quarters, when, 
in fact, he had not. 

---------- ;made a false official 

.................... 

----------- 

bellular 

I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  

C-..-.-..-.-..-.-.. 

------------. 

b.  On 28 January 2003, I considered A1 C1-. -. . -. -. . - Iactions serious enough to warrant trial 
by Special Court-Martial.  I still feel prosecution by Special Court-Martial is justified, however, 
my main concern is ensuring that A1 C: ----------. 
;be discharged fiom the Air Force expeditiously 
with a characterization that is clearly not honorable.  She should not be allowed to re-enlist in 
any branch of the Armed Forces or Armed Forces Reserve nor be able to tell others, in particular 
employers, that she served honorably in the Air Force. 

r - - - - - - - - -  

.---------- 

c,  As stated, my ultimate objective is that AlC; 

;be expeditiously discharged from the 

Air Force with a less than honorable characterizati6~-~~nderstand 
that she may not get a Bad 
Conduct Discharge (BCD) if she were tried by a Special Court-Martial.  If she was convicted, 
but did not receive a BCD, the unit would either have to take action to administratively discharge 
her or to cross-train her as she would no longer be eligible for the Security Forces career field. 
Given her theft from a fellow squadron member and her attitude and behavior, her presence in 
the unit, albeit for a short period of time, would be detrimental to good order and discipline. 
Having her back in the unit would seriously affect morale.  I feel it is the best interests of the unit 
and the Air Force that she be removed from the Air Force as quickly as possible. 

d.  While accepting her request for a discharge in lieu of court-martial 

------------- would allow her to 

- - - - - - , is an enlisted 
i father 
avoid jail time, it would not allow her to escape punishment.  AlC; --------ssss 
member of the Army.  He knows the stigma of receiving a UOTHC.  A 1 CL- -- --- -- -, :will live with 
the shame of her discharge and the burden of dishonoring her family for the rest of her life.  The 
UOTHC causes her to lose any benefits she has earned while serving in the Air Force and would 
most likely prevent her from ever obtaining employment with the federal government. 

e.  I believe discharging A1Ci - - - - - - - - - ,  

:with a UOTHC will send a strong message to the 

members of our unit that actions such as these are unacceptable and will be dealt with 
appropriately.  Unit members are aware of what she has ----------- 
Air Force the more morale is impacted.  Removing A1 Ci - - - - - - - - - - 
%om the Air Force quickly 
with a UOTHC boosts the legitimacy of the unit's disciplinary actions.  I believe this is in the 
:service. 
best interests of the unit and military and would be truly indicative of A1 C1-. . . . -. . . . -. 

done.  The longer she is retained in the 

....-.-....-- 

-...- .." -, 
, 

f.  My ultimate objective is that AlCi ..-.-....- :not 

be retained.  Having her return to the unit 

after serving confinement would be a worst-case scenario. 
2.  If this request for discharge is approved, I strongly recommend that A1 C ; - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -: 
receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge.  Only under this condition do I 
recommend the discharge in lieu of court-martial.  There have been no promises to A1 Ci -. -. . . . -. -I 
regarding the characterization of her discharge. 

I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  

a.  Is not under investigation. 

b.  Is not awaiting action under AFIs 36-2503 and 36-3212, or another section of this 

regulation. 

c.  Is not awaiting result of trial, 

d.  Is not absent without authority. 

e.  Is not absent in hands of civil authorities. 

f.  Has not been referred to a medical facility for examination. 

g.  Is not in default with respect to public property or public funds. 

h.  Has not completed 16 or more years of active military service. 

i.  Is not accountable or responsible for public property or funds. 

j.  Member has not received special pay, bonuses, or education assistance, 

4.  There have been no reports of misconduct since the incidents that led to the preferral of 
charges. 

5.  Court-martial charges have been preferred.  Attached are: 

A copy of the charges, DD Form 458, Charge Sheet (Attachment 1) 
86th SFS Incident Report, Case Number  12002120222 (Attachment 2) 

6.  Charges have not yet been referred for trial. 

7.  At the time of the misconduct, the airman did not have a mental disease or defect that caused 
her to lack the substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality (wronghlness) of the acts 
ox to conform to the law (AFI 44-109).  The airman presently has the capacity to understand the 
nature of the proceedings and to assist in the defense. 

A1 Cr---------- 

----------. 
9.  Other information: 

i does not hold an appointment as a Reserve commissioned or warrant officer. 

a.  Date and term of enlistment:  14 Jun 01 - 6 years. 

Date this period of continuous active duty started:  14 Jun 01. 
Pay date:  14 Jun 0 1. 
TAFMSD:  14 Jun 01. 
Dates of prior service:  None. 

b.  Date of birth:  5 Nov 83. 
c.  Test scores:  Adrn - 83, Elect - 62, Gen - 74, Mech - 59. 

d.  Formal training:  Basic Training and Technical School. 

e.  Date assigned to unit:  27 Dec 01, 

f. Current grade and effective date:  A1C - 10 Dec 01 

g.  Demotions, reasons, and dates:  None. 

h.  Time lost:  None. 

i.  Record of disciplinary actions:  None. 

j. Overall ratings and dates on EPRs:  None. 

k, Favorable communications, citations, or awards:  Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (2 OLC), 

National Defense Service Medal, Air Force Training Ribbon. 

1.  Derogatory data other than action by courts-martial or Article 15:  Letter of Reprimand (LOR), 

dated 17 Dec 02; LOR dated 16 Nov 02; LOR, dated 15 Jul02 (Attachment 3). 

m.  Medical or other data meriting consideration: None. 

r . . . - . - . . - . - . . - . - . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - J  

Commander 

Attachments: 
1. DD Form 458 
2.  86 SFS Report 
3.  Derogatory data 

a.  LOR, dated 1 7 Dec 02 
b.  LOR, dated 16 Nov 02 
c.  LOR,  dated 15 Jul02