AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

ME Of s,ERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
rnsr•

TYPE GEN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZA TJON

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZA TJON OF COUNSEL

1- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	:S-_T_T__N_G	-HON	GEN	-UO_TH_ _	OTH-E-R	- EN__Y

1
:	x
x x
' -------------------------------------- ·	x

ISSUES

A92.15 AOl.13 A92.35

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

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 APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

19 May 2004

FD-2004-00068

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise appl icant 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.

\

-----------------	--------- ----	----•4---	-----------------------------------	--------------------- . 	

SAF/MRBR
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

FD-2004-00068	
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 that  neither  the  evidence  of record  nor  that  provided  by  the  applicant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and was based on a disputed isolated incident.  The records indicated the applicant received ap Article 15, five Letters of Reprimand, four Records of Individual Counseling, a Memorandum for Record, and had an Unfavorable Information File for misconduct.  Her infractions included missing numerous appointments with her On-The-Job Training manager, failing to complete her Career Development Course in a timely manner after indicating to her supervisor on numerous occasions that she was progressing satisfactorily, obtaining services at the base dining facility for an unauthorized civilian by fraudulently using her own social security number, stealing government food items, three instances of failure to go, failing to inform her unit of a change of address and phone number thus rendering her unavailable for recall, and stealing several items of cologne from the Army and Air Force Exchange Service.  Member also had an Enlisted Performance Report rated an overall referral "2" that noted her misconduct, and another rated an overall "3" that stated her performance varied from "borderline marginal to excellent."  At the time of the discharge, member consulted counsel and submitted a statement in her own behalf admitting to making "mistakes" that she knew were "wrong" and her belief that she was a "good airman" who, if given the chance, could "demonstrate many good qualities to offer the Air Force."  In view of applicant's extensive record of misconduct, the DRB found her contentions without merit and opined that through the unit's many administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her negative behavior but was unable or unwilling 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.  Applicant states that her discharge did not take into account the good things she did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by her performance reports and other accomplishments.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

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