AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE  INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

;·--------------------------:
'	'
--------------------------- ·

·' -------------·'

AlC

'...............'.

TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

·.   ".'Y'"''1'i!il't' >'' NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

..

. .·· ··

MEMBER SITTING

'·'        ------------------------------------- '
'
'
---:'

'

'
'
;'
'' '
'
'
'
""   --------------------------------------

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

X*+ X*+ X*+
X*+ X*+

ISSUES

A94.ll A94.05 AOl.25

INDEX NUMBER	A66.00

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

.. ·····

AOl.51

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 HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

10 Aug 2006	FD-2005-00388
RAl10NAlllMi!.tE DISCUSSED ON THE ATfACHllD AIR FORCE D!Scttt.IMiE REV1$W ] 0AR.D DECISIONAL f!.A}f!OJ\!ALE

...... ..

Case heard in 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.

*Reason and Authority
+Reenlistment Code

-!i.IC.:<-"Jiilii!U'.R.F.CJWl.F.R. - - - _ /.1_ _ -.-,._ - •- ••- •-•••- ••••- • 2._. _ ...._. l<i/c.@\i:nr&[.!U'.llOAIUl.11.11.iiil'JQl\l1: ••_ ._/. _ ._ •••• ••••_ ._ ••_ ._ ••••_ ._ .,
'
i	:
:	:
•	---------------------------------------IN--D-O--R-S-E-M--E-N--T------ ·= ··-···=----------------------------D-A--T-E-:--8-/3-(-)/-2-0-0-6------ ·

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

I 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-2005-00388	

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

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, change ofreason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are 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 it was too harsh.  She further contends the discharge was based on inadmissible utter hearsay, no physical proof of drug abuse, and negative urinalysis. Applicant states her commander made an unfair judgment,  did not thoroughly review the situation and disregarded her submissions.  The Board found nothing in the records to substantiate any of these contentions.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 and two Letters of Counseling for misconduct.  The applicant received an Article 15 for wrongful use of Vicodin, a Schedule III controlled substance, which was the basis for her discharge.  She was punished with a suspended reduction in grade to airman and 15 days of extra duty.  The records also reflected that she received two Letters of Counseling for failing to bring CDC's into work for mandatory study time and for being disrespectful to a commissioned officer.  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.  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