PERSONAL APPEARANCE
NAME or COIJl'l:IELAND OR ORGANIZATIOl'I

x

-       --MEMBERS-SITTING

HON

UOTHC - --- - j)Tllll

DENY   _
x x x x x

A92.05, A92. 15, A94.05, A94.53

1  ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
2	

HEARING DAH
010131

CAS&NUMUR
FDOl--00007
3	
LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TUE BOARD
Jl[l)ITICNll.LEXIUBITS SUBMITTEDAT TIME Of
PERSCNll.L.APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING  OFPERSONAL APPERANCE  HEARING

RDIAKICS
Case heard at Washington, DC

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a perscrial appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR

SAFIMIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE40 RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE A IR FORCE PERSONNEl.COUNCU, Am FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
I S3S COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, M D 20762-7002

AFHQ  FORM 0-2077,JAN  00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used.

 	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGEREVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASENUMBER	

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 to exercise this right.

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

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety which would justify a change of discharge.

The applicant's issues are listed in the attached brief.

Issue  1.   Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.   The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for wrongfully using Psilocybe mushrooms.  The DRB carefully reviewed the mitigating circumstances the applicant described in her statement.   If she can provide additional documented information to  substantiate an  issue, the applicant should consider exercising her right to make  a personal appearance before the Board.   If she should choose to exercise her right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.  The Board concluded the misconduct was  a  significant  departure	conduct  expected  of  all  military  members.	The  characterization  of  the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2. Applicant provided information for the Board to 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 letters of recommendation and other information contained in the records. 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.

Issue 3. 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 July 20, 1998) that she understood she must receive an Honorable discharge to receive	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.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discretion of the discharge authority	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 should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief