AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
'IAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST   llDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

A IC
TYPE GEN	I PERSONA L APPEAR ANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW
COU1'o'SEL	NAME OF COU:-ISEL  AND  OR ORGANIZA'I JO:'ll	j   AOllRESS  AND  OR  ORGANIZ.11.TION   OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
. . ,.,,,_ ,, , :"-i';-ll"l'Oi!>T"<F-i :1--_--G-)--I<'-1->"',H:iFlLi:-•,!,,l,,l_\, 'R' -'ll,•:,-.t • <" '·• ;c;:r·.•;·•

MEMBER  SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x

x
x x
ISSUES	A94.06	INDEX   NUMBER	A67.IO	· .;•. c	!l'.!'.I'§ tf;B)j,llJli;fl'!j•Tllll;l!'1.mJ•. ·•· •...
I	ORDER APPOINTING  Tl IE BOARD	 	
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW  OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTTFICA TION
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 DA TE	CASE NUMBER

02 Ju n 2005	FD-2004-00471
APPLIC'A.NT'S,iSSlJ:Ei@(fj:Ilf6_qAJ)\ll);(iej,SO]ONAC'RATlONAL  AR1!.Dl_S:C:US$Jill Q/11 "I:HE 'ATTAtJiEP AlR FORCE DISCHARGE-REVI£W: OADECISIWAL R,ATip'f\1}4.E:      .... .

;        "	_ '._>.o..0i:.<   -   :-: -> <- - " < , -_,'.<_;_,:_,,	. :,     .	--   <- -'-   "	-	.
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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

I	/}

N      -·   "· N	'::" "	l!fil"@Sliil\f!CNT	. .	\)liif.E:  @liq	.

"	::,·:,_<···' "

-·-·	-··1

...·.	--	·-

TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REYIE'W BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAD DR, EE WIN"G, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762- 7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00471	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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

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

FINDINGS: The Board grants partial relief. The discharge is upgraded to Honorable. The reason and authority for the discharge and the reenlistment code will not change.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon the record  and  evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's discharge inequitable.

ISSUE:  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because she had mental and medical issues that were not taken into account at the time of her discharge.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article
15 for failure to go, a Vacation action under the UCMJ for stealing a pack of cigarettes from the AAFES, one Letter of Reprimand and five Letters of Counseling for various misconduct, three of which were being
late for duty.  While the Board does not condone the member's theft of cigarettes, a more serious offense, the Board noted sufficient evidence that raised a possi ble mitigating relationship between the applicant's four instances of arriving late for duty, to include her failure to go at the prescribed time to her place of duty, and resulting in non-judicial punishment.  The record clearly shows documented medical issues which may have had an impact in her actions.  When considering the totality of the member's military service, to include her three years of enlistment during which she demonstrated solid duty performance and an absence of misconduct, the Board concluded offering relief in favor of the applicant is appropriate in 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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief