i
f	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INlHAL)

TYPE

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZ.<\ TION	ADPRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

HON	GEN
x x x x x

UOTllC	OTHER

DEN11

HEARING DATE
22 JAN 03

CASENUMllER
FD2002-0388

1
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCH
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIM PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANC
GE R1!'V!EW !)

RKS
Case hea rd at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

Discharge is upgraded to Honora ble, Secretarial Authority.

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

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

CIL

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be u   d.

\
CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD02-0388

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but de   ined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors le_ading to t1
discharge.	'

FINDINGS: The discharge is upgraded to Honorable, and the reason for discharge is changed to Secretarial Authority.

The board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.  However, after a thorough review of the r1  ..ord, the Board finds that the applicant's character of discharge is inequitable.

ISSUE:  The applicant states that her discharge was inequitable because her commander recommer	ed her for discharge based on the fact that she would not reenlist and the fact that she was not given propel   ime to respond to the discharge.  The records indicate the member received a Special Court Martial for intentionally injuring herself by cutting her throat and by ingesting various medications and other  substances for the purpose of avoiding a temporary duty assignment to Saudi Arabia.  Then, on the   ay she
was to separate after four years of service, she received a General discharge.  After a thorough and ' t>mplete consideration of the information submitted by the applicant and the information contained in the re< Drd, the Board concluded there was sufficient mitigation and extenuation to substantiate upgrade of the disc  arge  and to change the reason for the discharge.  While the DRB did not condone the applicant's actions  they
did feel it would have been more equitable to let her separate at her ETS with an Honorable dischar  le.

CONCLUSIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with   tle procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion o  the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

However, in view of the foregoing findings the Board also concludes that the overall quality of the applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge.  Therefore, the applican   s characterization for discharge should be changed to Honorable.  The Reason for discharge should b changed to Secretarial Authority.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief