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
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL YES	No
x

---------------------------
_,

VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
X*+ X*+

-.

--

SS-U-E-S---------------------------------
A92.01	I    INDEX NUMBER	A67.70

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO JHE BOARD

X*+

X*+ X*+

A92.21	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
A94.05	2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
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

HEARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

22 Aug 2006	FD-2006-00013
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

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

{_

, LG!S..W..HCOFJ>J:R _ .2'2.-- ..:zt...... ........-""- ..........1st«J'i/Vl:TJBi.Q.F.l.!Q	Jllf.d?••••••••••••••,

''
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -,- -- --- - - - - - - - - --- - - - IMoiisF:NiE"NT- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _

' '' '
DTE: sm12006

TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM  0-2077, JAN  00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition wi ll be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00013	

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

Issue 1. Although not explicitly stated, the applicant suggested that her misconduct was inequitable because  it was too harsh and she was discharged for something she didn't do.  The records indicated the applicant received two Letters of Reprimand for misconduct.  The first Letter of Reprimand was for failing to go to her appointed place of duty at the time prescribed.  The second Letter of Reprimand and basis for discharge was for wrongfully using methamphetamines,  "ecstasy", cocaine and marijuana on divers occasions.  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.  Applicant states that her discharge did not take into account the good things she did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by her performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments.   They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and pursuing a degree in paralegal studies.  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.

Issue 4.  The applicant cited her desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.  The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, she signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on
June 19, 2002) that she understood she must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements.  The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

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