AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE  I NITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

r·-----------------------
'
------------------------J

AlC

:·- - - - - - - - - - - - ·:
-------------:

TYPE  GEN

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

Yli:S	I	No

M EMBER  SITTING
-----------------------------------­ ''
'

VOTE OF THE B(>AIW

HON	Ul-'N	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

X*·I X*·I

X*+

X*+

'

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

X*+

ISSUES

A95.00

INDEX  NllMDli:R	A67. 10	!--'---,..--- ---'""""  ilm:sitJ DM1   gij T H EB@OARD  ==· <=:i,

AOl.00

I                _f--O_R_D_E_R_A_P_PO_ _N_·1-_IN_G TH_E_. BO_A_R_D 	
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW Or DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRJEF Or PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXllll:l!TS SUBMITTED Al  TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
·	
I
·	
lAl'F. RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NLI MllU<

01 Dec 2006

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 AFBC M R

Names and votes wi l l be made available to the appl icant at the appl icant's req uest.

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenl istment Code

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------	r---	------
'

4

'
':.. .::.::mumu-:. r -<:r>• -	:.,,:••,:.,.,:l	tMt;·••••·,,.:.:.1.:.::·"·:,[-"u;;j;=---- ,.   r-""

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFl3, TX 781 50-4742

I    FROM:

•r" --	·:f••H/5/200()

SECRETARY m' THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCii. AIR t'ORCF. DISCllARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

I

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00096	

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 ofreason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. Applicant contends she is a single parent and states she has learned from her mistakes.  She is working full time, going to school and trying to make a better future for her children.  She has expressed a desire for upgrade to obtain her GI benefits and to allow for reenlistment in the armed forces.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, nine Letters of Reprimand, and a Letter of Counseling for misconduct.  The applicant received Letters of Reprimand for financial irresponsibility, failure to go, dereliction of duty, failure to accept responsibility, and a domestic dispute.  She received an Article 15 for failure to obey an order from her supervisor to cease driving on base without a valid driver's license and making a false official statement.  She was reduced in grade to Airman.  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 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 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