AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

YES	No
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

AB
x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

. J;!lll!iit futll!lllm··
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
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 DATE	CASE NUMBER

13 Jan 2004	FD-2003-00399

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

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF TIIE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL Am FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EC WING, JRD 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 !\'UMBER

FD-2003-00399	

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 available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of Discharge is denied.

ISSUE:  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article  l 5s and a Letter of Reprimand.  The first Article  15 was for willfully failing to remain alert while posted outside of the Weapons Storage Area.  The second one was for DWI, derelict in her duties by drinking underage and driving after her privileges were suspended.  The LOR was for driving under the influence of alcohol.  Applicant states that she told her commander that she had a drinking  problem and that he did nothing about it.  The records indicate the applicant completed ADAP on 25 May
01. The applicant also states that she was young and immature at the time of her misconduct.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 20 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence she was immature or did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

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