AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

TYPE

•GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
YES	NO
x

MEMBERS SITTING

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF Tillt llOARD

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES
A94.53

HEARING DATE
03-01-24

INDEX NUMBER
A67.10

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0362

JTS SUJIMITnD TO  Jiil BOARD ,   ' '
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DJSCH	GE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

ADDillONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT	OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

Al"PLICANT'S ISSUl! ANI)   UHIOfJU'>'S T>J!CISI	!iD'ON THll AITACHED AIR FOR<;:li DISCHMGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATION

REMARKS

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise appUcant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counseJ, and	e right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

s
550    STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EFV2)	Previous edition will b

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0362		

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

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance before the Discharge Review Board but de exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leaditig to the d FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.
The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the disch after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any.	

ined to

charge.

•ge, and	
Issues.    Applicant  was  discharged  for minor  disciplinary  infractions.    She had  two  AETC  Fo  ns  341,
Discrepancy Report, six Records of Individual Counseling, four Letters of Reprimand, and an A icle 15. Her misconduct included failure to remain within the confines of Sheppard AFB when required to,  entering or using a privately owned vehicle when prohibited from doing so while in phase training on two o casions, failing to keep her dormitory room in inspection order on two occasions, failing to observe curfew ours on three occasions, making a false statement, disrespect to a noncommissioned officer,  disrupting  er class while they were testing, engaging in horseplay in class, and failure to go to a mandatory appointr ent. At the time of the discharge, member waived her right to consult counsel and submit statements in 1er own behalf.  And, member offers no issues now.  The Board noted member was the same age as oth€  airmen who had adhered to the standards when her misconduct occurred, and she knew right from wrong. ihe was counseled in an effort to help her correct her deficiencies and had several  opportunities  to im1 ove her behavior. She failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. She was responsible for her acti ins, and therefore held accountable for them.   No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in tl   course of the records review.

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 discretic 11 of the discharge authority and that 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 •asis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief