AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRAOE	AFSN/SSAN
.----------------------------	._-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-,

''	''

AIC	''	''

·---------------------------- ·
TYPE GEN	x	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	I	RECORD  REVIEW
i4ilall$lill;"  . ·  NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

NUU'     '   u  "" """·•" '	·····-·· -······
IION	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

''

''	X+*
r:

''

''	X+	*
r-:
'

'' '--':
''

'

'
-:

X+*

X+*

''	X+*
'·---------------------------------------
ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBER	A67. 10	EXHIBlTS SUBqf ED TO'·THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING TIIE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVI EW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF or PERSONN EL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXH IBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

II EAJUNG UA TE	CASE NUMBER

06 Jun 2006	FD-2005-00496
Al'l'LlCANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOAIJ,D' $ DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW !JOAIW DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR Names and votes wi ll be made available to the appl icant at the appl icant's req uest.

* - RE Code
+ - Reason and Authority

_S!'Jtl:rY¥-QF.:MfPAA.F,,  _.:""
0

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]_s!	! _Q': !IP_R_D_ l! l,!>£'1}.;i,_ _ _ _ /)_ _ _ _ _ j J_ _ _ _ _ ;

:	'

'

'	'
'	'
-----------------------------·-------------I-N-D--O-R--S-E-M--E--N-T-------=-----------------------------·------	...,D, -A-I	:-6-/-1·212006
'''"'''""'"""""
TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL
AIR  'ORO: DISCHARGE R:v1:w ROARU
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND UR, EE WING, 31W FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150.4742	;\NUREWS Al'll, MU 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous ed ition will be used

CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2005-00496

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

The applicant  appeared  and testified  before the  Discharge  Review Board  (DRB),  without  counsel, at Andrews AFB on 06 Jun 2006.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #6: Character reference letters (2)

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

FINDINGS:	Upgrade  of  discharge,  change  of  reason  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. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 and four Letters of Reprimand for misconduct. The applicant was disciplined with two Letters of Reprimand for failure to attend mandatory formations on two occasions. The LORs referred to previous incidents of similar nature. The applicant received her third Letter of Reprimand for an incident of inappropriate outburst of anger and insubordi nation that demonstrated a loss of self control and unprofessionalism. This Letter of Reprimand also indicated previous problems of a similar nature. The applicant received non-judicial punishment, Article 1 5, for sleeping while on duty. Despite receiving three LORs and an Article 15 during one rating period, the applicant's duty performance documented by enlisted performance report closing 8 months after non-judicial  punishment documented very good duty performance. Shortly after close-out of this performance report the applicant, while on duty, improperly pulled her loaded weapon from its holster during an argument with her boyfriend at the barracks, a serious offense for which she received a Letter of Reprimand followed shortly thereaiter by notification of administrative discharge. During testimony, she stated she pulled her weapon in a threat to harm herself not her boyfriend. Although not in the available records, the applicant testified she voluntarily sought counseling in the life skills clinic. The ORB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her pattern of 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.

The Board noted the good aspects of her duty performance as well as character letters written by supervisors at the time of discharge and those submitted by the applicant at the time of the Board but opined that  although she appeared to have had overcome her initial disciplinary infractions, the final incident when she improperly pulled her weapon was a very serious infraction that clearly established a recurring pattern of conduct unacceptable in all military members that was not responsive to corrective actions. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board considered the personal stressors the applicant was experiencing at the time of her offenses along with
the documented duty performance and concluded that her misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of her service. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

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 appl i cant 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