I
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME  OF SERVICE MEMBER  (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
1.,mrr	a 11111 I
--RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

VOTE OF THE BOARD

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD

A94.05

A67.90	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFJCA TION

HEARING DATE
9 0CT 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0094

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT  TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARrNG
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applica nt of the decision of the Boa rd and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

DATE:  9 OCT 03

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 REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2003-00094	

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Andrews AFB, MD on October 9, 2003.
The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5: Bank of America Letter dated 22 Sep 03.
Exhibit 6: Three Customer Service Surveys.

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of Discharge, change of reason and authority, and change of reenlistment code is denied.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received a General Discharge due to a Special Court Martial for falsely altering military identification cards. She also received two verbal counseling's for dereliction of duty based on unsatisfactory duty performance and two Letters of Reprimand for dereliction of duty and for failure to return to duty after an appointment. The applicant states that: "I was an individual under the age of 21 in Las Vegas, and I fell prey to the temptations of this city." The applicant involved six other Airman, altered
her own ID Card 22 times by using old ID Cards that were turned in. She copied the back and glued it to her	
ID Card to look like she was over 21 years old. Through the verbal counseling' s and Letters of Reprimand, the unit tried repeatedly to provide her with opportunities for rehabilitation. Her repetitive misconduct and the nature of that misconduct showed a blatant disregard for military standards and the law. These repeated violations of the UCMJ resulted in her placement in remedial training, the verbal counseling's, the Letters of Reprimand, a UIF established and a conviction by a Summary Court-Martial. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her negative behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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