:\AME m SER\ ICE MEMBER n.AST, flRST MIDDLE INITL\L)
,.--------------------------------------------    ..
'	'
-------------------------------------------

T\l'F U E N

I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE

l'Ol'NSEI.

'\.\\IE OF COl'NSEL ANIJ 011. OJl.l;AML\.TIO"I

YE

N11

llON

Gl:'."J

UOTHC

I

1

2

3

4

C.\SE NLM BEll.

FD-2005-00441

AI R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE

.U'S:\iSSAN

AB

'     ----------------'

x

I

 	''.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -''·

RECORD REVIEW

·-1
I
I I
--1

AIJDll.ESS Al'iD OJI. OR(;,\NCL\.TlO'i OF l'Ol'iSEL

I

I
I
j

x

I

: ._..••.

VOTE OF mE BOARD

i

I

·._·

.·..

I

MEMBER SITTING

--- --·
Ol lll·.R

I

ul.·.

'1.--------------------------------------------

n
H

J •

,,

---- - ---
Ill · N 'l
x
---.--
x

I

I
i
j
'!

i,,'

r:

!'	x
'

r:

-+--

..

I•

I'

Lo

!•:

1    --------------------------------------------

I l:'-.L F

l'iDEX 'l'.,l!IER

!
!
;
:

A94.53
A93.01

A67.IO

I x
x
·..._	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD ORDFR  1\PPOll\Tl G Tl IL BOARD APPU(:i\1'101\ FOR RFVIl·:\V 01· DIS('! !AR< ;1: LElTFR 01-    OTl!- JL\TIO N
RRllT OF PERSO "JH. FILI
COlJ NSEI.·s RIJ XASI:TO !Ill· BOAR D ADDITIOl\;\I. LXH!BITS SUBMITITD  .\'!   IIfr. OI PERSONAi AP PLARANC 'I·:

I

--1
i
- -1
I

I

- -1
I
-- 1
---- i

I

I

I
·i
I

--- -·

TAPE RECORDINCi 01· l'l·RSO"J;\I  Al'l'l·,-\ R;\N( ·1 ·

111: \RI'(; ]),\TE

05 J un 2006

.,

,. ......

, ,

"

'

,'   '

I Case heard al Wash ington, D.C.
!
l
I Ad \ ise appl ica n t of t he decision of the Board, the righ t to a personal appea ra nce wi th/wit hout counsel, and the righ t to
i submi t  an  applicat ion  to t he AFBCMR
I Na mes and  votes will  be made  available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

I
l

;

'I .l'.:::-.\ --u-i,i::-! t-=-_-_ _-_=_ =_ _=_=_ =_ _=_ _=_=_=_,_,.:,.c_

:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .h..1.t;-i-ti-f.f-i=.'i.l,.t.119'-'".!l-P.i:. lpl'R..f..2.......-=.+_-_ _ _ _ .,,<_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2"""-

\ I	I

II •

,
::z

iu _=o»>_	- :

INDORSllMENT	•--:.;c;;--- ""'.j:i{Cc·------ m,..-----·::iiATir"r;i;,;

TUc	FROM:

_'i 'il) ( s rn.F\·T \VlSI'. SlJ ITF +o
IV\ N DOI.I'll 1\ I R TX 78150-47+2

Sf:Lll.ETARY OF TIU: MR FOii.CE Pt:11.so 'l.L l'Ol' CIL Alli. FOii.CE DISCllAll.l;E REVIEW 80.-\11.D
1535 COMM.-1.'iD DR. EE WING, 311.D H.OOR M•DREWS AFR, MD 20762-70<11

Al-'HQ FORl\·I 0-2077, J AN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous ed i tion w i ll be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE "'UMBER

FD-2005-00441	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

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: 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 she has matured in the past two years and is ashamed of the irresponsible behavior she exhibited, regrets the problems she caused, has been carrying a chip on her shoulder since her mother died of cancer, and now realizes she needs to make mature decisions because she wants to have a positive attitude and outlook on life. The ORB was pleased to see that the applicant feels she has matured and is doing well; however, these are not matters of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, eight Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling and three Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct to include numerous instances of failure to maintain and clean her dorm room, lying, reporting to work unfit for duty, personal hygiene issues, writing bad checks, failure to maintain possession of her gas mask, numerous instances of improper dress and appearance, failure to pay just debts, failure to properly register her vehicle, and failure to go. 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