AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAMEt>F SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

AlC	• Ill If Ill &;
x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67. 10

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
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

06 Dec 2003

FD-2000-0058

Case heard at Randolph AFB, Texas.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2000-0058	

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

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 and change ofreason and authority for discharge 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 contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for drinking under age. She also received three Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling, five Memorandums for Record and a Verbal Counseling for various instances of misconduct. The DRB opined that  through these administrative actions, the applicant had  ample opportunities to change her negative behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was  a  significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. Applicant states that her discharge did not take into account the good things she did while in the service. 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.
Applicant contends that she should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake she made when young.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 20 years of age (one month shy of turning 21) when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence she was immature or did not know right from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

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.

Inview 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 should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief