AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REV1EW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
		GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
-:t 1  mu
X   RECORD REVIEW		

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

.· dll a 11117 lllP.
j            TYPE

GEN	PERSONAL APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANl1.ATION

I  ADDRESS ANO OR ORGANIZATION m· COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

-
x
x

HEARING DATE

CASE NUMBER

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE 130ARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

02 09-17

FD2002-0200	COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
AVD!TIONAL EXHIBITS SlffiMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARTNG

REMARKS
Case heard at 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.

SAF/MIBR
S50 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR A.i"lDREWS AfB. MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD DECISIONAL RATlONALE	CASE NUMBl<:R

FD2002-0200	

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

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

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the appl icant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge and change ofreason, authority, and reenlistment  code are denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by applicant substantiates an in equity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. She was two  AETC Forms 173, "Student Record of Counseling," and six Letters of Reprimand. Her misconduct included failure to go, failure to obey a lawful order, a dormitory  inspection violation, disrespect to superior noncommissioned officers, provoking  speech, and sleeping in class. At the time of the discharge, after consulting counsel, member submitted a statement in her own behalf accepting responsibility for her unacceptable behavior and requesting another chance to prove her commitment to the AF. Applicant essentially takes  the  same approach now, and notes she has matured since separating, and is involved in various community activities. The Board noted that member was the same age as other airmen who adhere to the standards when her misconduct occurred, and she knew right from wrong. She was responsible for her actions, and therefore was held accountable for them. She was counseled repeatedly and given  numerous  opportunities  to improve her behavior but fail ed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

The applicant cited her desire to return to military service. While the Board commends applicant on this desire as well as her post-service accomplishments, and is sympathetic to the impact a General discharge has on her reenlistment code, this is not a matter of equity or propriety that warrants an upgrade.

If the applicant can provide additional information about her discharge, and documented evidence to substantiate an inequity or impropriety, she should consider exercising her right to a personal appearance hearing, and be prepared to present the Board with evidence of an inequity or impropriety as well as her exemplary post-service accomplishments and contributions to the community.

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.

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