•
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME  OF SERVICE MEMBER  (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
AB	U llllb a

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X    RECORD REVIEW

COUNSEL
>,. ,,'
YES	NO
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZA TlON OJ' COONSEL

VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBERS SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

JtXIUBfl'S sVllMrtTED TO. TllE BOARD

A93.09

A67. 10	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING DATE
15 Ju l 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0108

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
Al'!'LlCANnnssUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISl()NAI. RATIONAL All.I? DlSCUSSlm C)NJ'ttli AyVICHED AIR FORCE bJSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONAL&:  '

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appeara nce with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SAF/MJBR
550 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
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

........(     ...

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD03-0108	

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

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

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant believes her discharge was too harsh because her problems stemmed for getting a new supervisor and because her mother was tenninally ilL The record indicates the applicant received two Articles 15, both for willfully failing to complete her duties. She also received three Letters of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling for being late for work, failure to perfonn her duties, failure of her CDC test, insubordination, and assault. The DRB was sympathetic to the impact the loss of her mother had on her, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety that would warrant an upgrade. The member knew right from wrong. 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. The Board found no evidence of any inequity or impropriety on which to base a decision to upgrade the discharge.

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