AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MJOOLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
1--------'1!<AME Of COUNSEL AND OR ORCANIU.TION
YES	No
x

X	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESSAND OR ORCANIZATlON OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x

ISSUES

A92.21 A92.01

INDEX  NUMBER	A67.10

x x x
x
,£    lllBIU SUOMITI£D'fQ TOE	ARD ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFI CATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED ATTIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANC'E

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARAN CE HEAR ING

HCARINC DATE	CASE NUMBER

27 Mar 2014

FD-2013-00766

Case heard in 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.

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

fROM:

SECRETARY Of THC AIR f ORCt Pl;RSONNE LCOUNCIL AIR FORCE OISCllARC>:R F.VIEW DOARO 153COMMAND OR. EE WINC,JRD Fl.OOR
ANOREl\'S AF'S, MO l07'1 7t01

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00766	

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

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

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
ISSUE:   Applicant received a general discharge due to misconduct -minor disciplinary actions

Applicant states that her discharge did not take into account the good things she did while in the service.  The recorded indicated that the member received one Article 15 and four Records of Individual Counseling. Her misconduct included stopped and detained by civilian law enforcement trooper for speeding, driving on suspended license, language and conduct unbecoming of an NCO and lied to the trooper,  failed to go on time to mandatory squadron run as ordered by SQ CC, Flight CC, and supervisor, slept on duty, failed to go to PHA, late in completing continuation training, departed duty location after issuing 5 day weather forecast
(between 0115 - 0230) and did not notify other agencies and did not return until 0615, created 5 day forecast and did not send it as required, departed duty location and found at home sleeping by day shift, failed to go
to duty, and failed to obey lawful order from NCO to report to work NLT 1200. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by her performance reports, letters of recommendation 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 discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well, has a good job and was involved the community.  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.

The applicant cited her desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.  The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, she signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on January 12, 1998) that she understood she must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements.  The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

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