AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

- NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

AlC		._   X	RECORD REVIEW

YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

ISSUES

A94. 11

MEMBER SITTING

INDEX NUMBER	A67.90

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

A93.31

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

18 Aug 2004	FD-2004-00186

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 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

FD2004-00186	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board 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 applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify  a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because she was purposely targeted  and  treated unfairly due to her sexual orientation. Applicant was discharged for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. She had two Articles 15; assaulting another female  airman, damaging government property, disorderly conduct, failure to obey a lawful order, disrespect to a noncommissioned officer in the execution of his duties, and resisting arrest. These incidents occurred June 1999 and May 2000. The record also disclosed that applicant had previously participated in alcohol rehabilitation programs  in  1997 and  1998, and in 1998 had been diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with depressed mood after an over-the-counter medication overdose that required emergency treatment. In 1997 she sought entry into an  anger management class after two alcohol-related incidents resulted in fights and police being called. In 1999, member was again evaluated and diagnosed with a personality disorder which interfered with her ability to function in the military. Although so diagnosed, this was not used as a basis for discharge and was not required to be in light of her misconduct, which formed a more appropriate basis for the discharge. At the time of the discharge, member consulted counsel and waived her right to submit a statement in her own behalf. The Board noted member was given several  opportunities to correct her behavior  but was either unwilling or unable to do so. Because member was responsible for her actions, she was held accountable for them. The Board found nothing during the course of the record review regarding her sexual orientation and so found no merit in her contention. There  was no inequity or impropriety on which  to base  an upgrade, thus the characterization of service was deemed appropriate in view of the repeated 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