AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

X  PERSONAL APPEARANCE

RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS  SITTING	uornc	OTHER	DENY
x x x x x

INDEX NUMBER
A92.21	A67.90

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

HEARING DATE
2 JUN 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0150

3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDillONAL EXlflBITS SUBMITfED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

REMARKS
Case heard at Scott AFB, Illinois.

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

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

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANOOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0150	

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Scott AFB, IL on June 2, 2003.  The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:

Exhibit 5: Applicant's contentions.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge to Honorable is denied.
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety or inequity that would justify upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with a General Discharge for several disciplinary infractions. Member received two Article l5s for underage drinking. She also received one Letter of Reprimand for underage drinking and a Letter of Counseling for dereliction of duty. Applicant states she continued to drink alcoholic beverages even after she received non-judicial punislunent. The DRB concluded that the applicant was given the opportunity to correct her behavior but chose to continue possessing alcohol. She was apprehended  for possessing  alcohol the day after she was issued a Letter  of Reprimand.   The
characteristic of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

The applicant claims she was not given the opportunity to adequately prepare and present her case. The DRB has made every attempt to provide the applicant with ample opportunity to present  her  case and submit any documentation to support her cause. The applicant's case went before a  non-personal appearance on July 12, 2000 and a personal appearance on June 2, 2003. Furthermore, the applicant was offered on June 3, 2003 an additional 30 days to submit further documentation. An additional statement was submitted but it did not provide any new or clarifying information to support her case. At the time the additional statement was submitted, the applicant informed her counsel she still did not feel she was able to completely present her case.

Additionally, there appears to be an issue concerning the relationship between the applicant and her mother. The DRB welcomes any applicant's guest to either testify before the Board or view the Board's proceedings. The  applicant's mother appears to be very interested in supporting her daughter and has participated with her daughter in the DRB process. However, the applicant refused to allow her mother to testify on the applicant's behalf or view the hearing.

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.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief