AIR FORCE  DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBl<:R (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
·--------------------------------------­

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN
;--------------

--------------------------------------:	AlC

L••••••••••••••J

TYPE  GEN

I	PERSONAL APPEARA NCE

''	''
x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

co1.1,N. SE_L_..... NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANl7.ATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF THE BOARD ·.
!----------"'' ,..··<   ·'·'··  -------1

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTI IC	OTHER	DENY

X*+

--'

_,

''
''
''
''' '' '''
''
''

X*+

X*+

X*+

L•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••'•	X*+

ISSUES

A95.00 AOI.00

INDEX NUMBER

A60.00

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO T:HE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOJNTJNG THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCIIARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TI ME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  I IE

HEARING DATE	

20 Mar 2007	FD-2006-00388
t\.l'PldCAN'f'.S 1SSUE AND THE l!OARO'S DECISIONAL RATIOJllAL AIU\ DISCUSSED ON THI! ATTACHED AIR fORtl1 t1ISCltAROE MVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONAL!!

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 wi l l be made avai lable to the appl icant at the appl icant's request.

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenl istment Code

'

'v
''·-----------------·-----,..----...-·;	;--- ----c-------u-------------- ---·-- ----- ; ;'
312112001:	, .

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STR EET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCF. PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR fORCF. DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD
I$)$ COMMAND  DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR AN()RF.WS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00388	

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 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:

The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record.  The applicant expressed a desire to upgrade her discharge to qualify for enlistment into the armed forces.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article  l 5s, a Record oflndividual Counseling, a Memorandum  for Record and three AETC Form 34 l s for misconduct.
The applicant received her first Article 15 for stealing four video games and five greeting cards from the Army and Air Force Exchange Service.  She was punished with a forfeiture of pay, 7 days of extra duty, and restriction to base for 7 days.  Her second Article 15 was for stealing a neck wallet and its contents from another airman and throwing the mil itary identification card into a dumpster.  She was reduced in grade to Airman.  She was administratively disciplined for being late for PT, failure to complete code maintenance training for the second time, missing from duty, and having an unclean room.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the applicant's 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 equitabl e basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief