AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME  01'' SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AliSN/SSAN

:----------------------------------:
'	'
---------------------------------J

SGT	-.---------------'

:	:

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

TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

C(IUN$EL , ,>,':  NAME OF COUNSEL AND OD ODGANIZATION YES	]	No
I x

ADDRESS AND On ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

V:T,t;lOF THEJJOARD
1-------,--- ''' >-_,,>:,i.:.:.:.:..............	,,.,_--,   ------ ..· ·"•"'''

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTIIC

OTHER

DENY

x x x x
x

SSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBED

A67.10

,, EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO 'F¥E JJOARD
]	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
ADDI flONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBED

21 Nov 2006	FD-2005-00489
Al'fLIC.ll\l'll!S(l$$Ql1 ANtl,Tll l!QARD's OECISIONAt RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON TH1! A1TAClll!O AIR l'ORCll DI	,	'
'     '-''17'?	· "'' :: 'ti'{
Case heard in Washington, D.C.

AllJ) llllClSJONAL RATIONAtE

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 req uest.

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

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

SECRETARY OF TH£ AIR FORCE Pl':DSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD lSJS COMMAND DD, El: 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-2005-00489	

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:

Issue 1. Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends her discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  She also contends that she was discharged for misconduct because she couldn't find a short term designee for dependent care and no action was ever taken against her husband.	The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Letter of Reprimand, three Letters of Counseling, and three no-show letters for misconduct.  The applicant was administratively disciplined for failure to go on three separate occasions, financial irresponsibility, and dereliction of duty resulting in an eviction from her residence for non-payment of rent.  The records also indicated she received an Article 15 for failing to inspect life support equipment and making a false official statement.  She received a suspended reduction in grade to Airman First Class, forfeiture of pay, and 45 days of extra duty.  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.

Issue 2.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and seeking her baccalaureate in criminal justice.  However, no inequity or impropriety in her discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized her term of service.

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