AMN	. .... ..

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
•	NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
,

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING
-'         ------------------------------------
'
'
'

'
-------------------------------------

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x
x x

ISSUES

A94.53

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

l	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 EXHI  ITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

30 Jul 2004	FD-2004-00033

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.

--------------	------	--------------    "'-------------------------------------------------------

··.

-

'
'
'
'
'
'
'

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

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

(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

/

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00033	

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.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUES:

Issue 1.  Applicant was discharged for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.  The records  indicated the applicant received two Articles 15, a Letter of Reprimand, a verbal counseling documented in a Memo for Record, had an Unfavorable Information File, and was placed on the Control Roster for misconduct.  Member's infractions included being late to work, feigning illness repeatedly over a 19-month period to avoid her augmentee duties, behaving with disrespect toward two noncommissioned officers, and toward a commissioned officer on a separate and distinct occasion.  Applicant states her discharge was fair and just, and she has learned from her experiences.  The DRB felt that that through the unit's administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her negative behavior but failed to do so.  The
Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate.

Issue 2.  The applicant cited her desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.  The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, she signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on July 17, 1996) that she understood she must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational
entitlements.  The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant 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 should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief