AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER ILAST. FIRST Mmm " Jl\lf'flAL)

x	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

GRADE

AMN

AFSN/SSAN

RECORD REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEi" AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING
x x x
x
x

ISSUES

A94.06 A92.02

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

1	ORDER APPOrNTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
1	
3	LETTER OF NOTJFICATJON
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 Nl:MBER

IO Nov 2005	FD-2005-00341

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, and the right to submit an application to the AFBC MR Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

TO:

SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANOOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

FROM:

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-2005-00341	

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Andrews AFB on  I0 Nov 2005.

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge to honorable is granted. Change of reason and authority for discharge, and change ofreenlistment code are denied.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was  too  harsh  and  did  not  take  into account the quality of her service. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand, and a verbal reprimand for minor discipli nary infractions over a four month period including one incident of driving under the influence, two uniform violations, and a failure to go. Although  the Board noted the pattern of misconduct indicated a failure to respond to counseling and properly formed the basis for administrative discharge, it considered evidence of excellent duty performance as evidenced by performance reports and numerous character letters from senior NCOs and senior officers from the time of her discharge in the personnel record. The Board opined that the evidence of the record and that obtained from testimony supported an upgrade to honorable. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the incidents of willful misconduct which were the basis for this case and therefore the Board concluded that the narrative reason for discharge was proper and equitable and that a change in the reenlistment code was not 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. 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 without change in the narrative reasons or reenlistment code. The applicant 's characterization should be changed to  Honorable under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief