AlR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
-' -------------------------------------------- ·'	I   ••••••••••••••• •1
''	''	A I C	'	'

'    -------------------------------------------- '·

''	''

-----------------

x

TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	I	RECORD  REVIEW
"	COUNSEL	NA.ME OF COUNSEL A.ND OR ORGANIZATION	A.DDRESS A.ND OR ORGA.NIZ;\TION  O." COUNS;L
YES	No
x

MEM BER SITTI NG	<<

VOT OF THEJJ,\OARD
-- .-"""'NUU ..-..     ..

1-o

I-'

n

---------------------------------- ·'
'''
'' ''' '
''
'' '
''
'' '
''
''
---------------------------------- ·

IION	GEN	UOTI IC      OTHER	UENY

X+ X+ X+
x
x

ISSUf.S	A42.00	INDEX NUMBER	A67.50

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD	'

A93.31	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REV I EW OF DISCHARG E
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOAR D
ADDITIONAL EX! 1113ITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEAR ANCE
TAPE RECOR[)J NG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEA.RING DA.TE	CA.SE NUMBER

27 Jun 2006	FD-2005-00427
APPLlCANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S Dl'CISJONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AlR FORCE DISCBARGE REVIEW BOARD DllClSJONAL·RATlONALE

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

Names and votes wi l l  be made avai lable to the applicant at the applicant's request.

+ C	N,, JE REASON	ND AUTHPRITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY
Gi:r J¥.!J!l..'2'1':::_ ..i:.--._ ••_ ••_ ••A._ .._ .._ .._ .._ ...._ .._ .._ .._i_s!9 P.'!tE.'2 !'?_A_Rk! 1	.	••_ •• .L_ .._ ..L.....

'	'

'
i:.._...-............  .....,.• ._,I!'-#" .....,..,-11!...1"1!' -.....,..,- e..J" ·.... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·1·•f"·--...-.... ·......... -........_ _ .."" ----- .._,.............._. - - - - - - - - - - _:
INDORSEMENT	DATE:  6/29/2006" 	
,,· """"'    . '	' ''"·'·"·"··················'·······-·-	--.,·M"''  "'
TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORC[ PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING. JRD Fl-OOR
RANDOLPH APB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS Al'll, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, J A N 00	(EF-V2)	Previous ed ition wi l l be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00427	

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

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB),  without  counsel,  at Andrews AFB on 27 June 2006.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #5: 3 Character Reference Letters
Exhibit #6: Business Certificate (New Hope Surrogacy Center) Exhibit #7: Appointment Letter as College Senator
Exhibit #8: Ohio State University grades

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

FINDINGS:  The Board grants the requested relief.

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 reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because she was discharged while the other party involved with her in an adulterous relationship was not discharged.  The Council did not agree that this demonstrated an inequity.  The other individual may have had a very different service record from the applicant.  The applicant's record was filled with documented episodes of interpersonal conflict and insubordination that disrupted her unit.

Issue 2.  Although the applicant did not argue the following point, the DRB granted an upgrade based upon the applicant's mental health issues and the peculiar form the unit's rehabilitative efforts took.  The applicant's tragic history of sexual abuse as a child obviously severely affected her mental and emotional well-being and rendered her incapable of adapting to the needs of the military.  While her medical records did not quite provide all the evidence which would have supported a mental health discharge, there was no doubt in any of the DRB member's minds that her issues significantly impaired her ability to perform her duties.  Additionally, her unit repeatedly verbally counseled her for multiple infractions and did not utilize appropriately graduated disciplinary tools in a timely fashion.  It appeared to the Council that the unit's failure to utilize an increasingly severe response to recurrent misconduct had the effect of leading the applicant to believe that there would be no serious response to her misconduct.  The unit kept voluminous memos for record concerning her behavior, but did not properly document those events at the time they occurred and failed to take rapid disciplinary action.  Instead they waited until there was an overwhelming mass of evidence documenting the interpersonal conflicts the respondent generated and then used that evidence to discharge her.  Under the highly unusual facts of this case, the DRB unanimously concluded that the respondent's mental health issues significantly contributed to her problems dealing with superiors and
co-workers.  The majority of the DRB also believed her unit did not properly respond to her disciplinary infractions.  The DRB concluded the equitable course of action was to upgrade the respondent's discharge to honorable and change the reason for the discharge to Secretarial Authority.	

The Board concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable service characterization and the reason for the discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority. The applicant's service characterization should be changed to Honorable and the reason for discharge should be changed to Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief