AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

r
YES

ITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.53 A93.17

INDEX NUMBER

A67.70

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 2005	FD-2005-00068

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.

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

TO:	FROM:
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, 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 NUMBER

FD-2005-00068	

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.

ISSUE:   Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because the investigation leading to her discharge was based on rumors and wrongful information. The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s, a Letter of Reprimand, and a Record of Individual Counseling.  Her misconduct included late for work, two instances of underage drinking, impeding an official investigation, and wrongfully distributing Lortab, a Schedule II controlled substance.   The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her negative behavior.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.   Ifshe can provide additional
documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising her right to make a personal appearance before the Board.  Ifshe should choose to exercise this right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.  The
characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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