t

!
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

TYPE

AFSN/SSAN

m	HI  22

GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X    RECORD REVIEW

··. • OUNJ!i. ;f'::!fi\\,):     NAMl OF COUNSH AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	NO
x

ADllRESS ANll OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS  SITTING	HON

:

P -------------------------------------- .
'

VOTE OF THE BOARD: <·:

UOTHC

OTHER

. "
DENY
x

'

'
r-	-·----- -	----+----+-----+------+-----i-x-----;
x x
x
-------------------------------------- ·

ISSUES
A93.23, A92.J S, A93.17

IND•:x NUMB•;R
A67.10	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REV IEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
2	
HEARING DATE
03 01 08

CASE NUMBER
FD2002·0234

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TllE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITfED AT  TJME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

,< /

·. Al'PLJCANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE·DISCUSSED ON THE ATf ACllE))"i\llt l'ORCI! :OlSCUAAGll Rl!VIBW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.
7'!1;<	,<. <;·	« ) /	)
REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Boa rd and the right to a personal a ppearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

-S-IG--N-A-T-U-R-E--O-F

_S 9:::\}}J!l_E_ Q!'.!J!>_   I?_ !'!.l i!.  1.: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

/	< '
INDORSEMENT

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIE\V BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASI> NUMBER

FD2002-0234	
GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

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 applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS:   Upgrade of discharge 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  an upgrade of the discharge to honorable.

Issues.  Applicant was discharged for mjnor disciplinary infractions and drug abuse.  She had an Article 15, a vacation of suspended punishment, three letters of reprimand (LORs), and a Record of Individual Counseling. Her misconduct included late to work, failure to obey a lawful order, failure to pay a just debt, writing bad checks, failing her quarters inspection, and according to her own spontaneous verbal admissions and a signed, sworn statement soon after submitting to an urinalysis, using marijuana on at least two occas10ns. These offenses all occurred within an 8-month period. At the time of the discharge action, member waived her right to submit statements in her own bchaJf.  Applicant  now  contends  she was suffering from deep depression, but concedes her judgment was intolerable and brought discredit to her and the Air Force. Member's medical records were not available to the board to review, however the discharge records indicate member was a patient on an in-patient psychiatry ward for 2 weeks due to her depression. In spite of member's mental health situation, she was still responsible for her  actions of misconduct and must be held accountable for those; existence of a potential character and behavior  disorder does not bar separation for any other authorized reason, such as misconduct, if that reason is more  appropriate;  a discharge for a mental health disorder is not appropriate if the ainnan 's record supports discharge for misconduct. Furthermore, while understandable that members experiencing personal problems may have additional stress, applicant  submitted no documentary evidence of those problems, how they were unique, or that she sought help from available agencies such as the Chaplain, Family Support Center, or her chain of command. The Board concluded member's misconduct was an extremely  significant  departure  from conduct expected of all military members, and further noted that she was counseled several times in an effort to help her correct her deficiencies, and had multiple opportunities to improve her behavior but failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. Member was the same age as other airmen who had adhered to the standards when her misconduct occurred, and she knew right from wrong. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

Applicant cited her desire to receive his G.I. Bill education benefits as justification for an upgrade. While the Board was sympathetic to the impact of the loss of these benefits on applicant, this is not a matter of equity or propriety that warrants an upgrade.	
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 shou1d not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief