AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

.

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

''--------------------------'
'	'
------------------------- ·

AMN

·---- ----- --- --- --·

'	'

'	'
'	'

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD REVIEW

YES

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING	!ION

GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DEN Y

1- - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.------------------+------+-----l-----+----+	1
'
X*
X* X* X*

ISSUES

A93.01 A94.05

'

---------

INDEX NUMBER

A67.00

X*

.E..•.·.•...•...·.....·.•.·....x·.....f....·.·.·l.•.·.•.·....••..•·..•..1BITS' SU. , BM, IT:'::F:::::::::E::::::::::D:::::::::::(:::::I:::: '·O.:,,· ...•.•..•.·l.•.•.·.•.·.•l.•.•.•.B...•.·.•.•.•.·..••..•·.·..··.·..··.·..E•.•.•.•.•.·.•.•...•.a•.•.··.···.···········Q·····.·.·.•·..•.•.A RD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTI FICA'l'ION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
AD )l 1'10  AL EX   IBH ' SUBMITTED A'J  TIME    F PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDTNG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

08 May 2007	FD-2007-00002

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

-------------------------------------------------------------------1'.:.	·-----------------"'1 -------------	1

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78 I 50-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR  t"ORCE PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
I535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RO FLOOR ANDREWS  AFll,  MD  2076P002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2007-00002	

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

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 and change of reason and authority for discharge 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:

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends her discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  She admits to minor infractions during her three years of service and attributes this to youth and lack of maturity.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Vacation, eight Letters of Reprimand, and seven Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  The applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go to her appointed place of duty.  She was punished with a suspended reduction in grade to Airman, forfeiture of pay for two months, and 15 days of extra duty.  The Vacation action was also for failure to go to her appointed place of duty.  For this misconduct, she was reduced in grade to Airman.  The records also indicated the applicant continued her misconduct and was administratively disciplined for being late for
duty, forwarding chain letters over the Air Force email, failure to carry out instructions, sleeping in the lounge during duty hours, disrespect towards an NCO, failure to complete CDCs and test failure, dereliction of duty, failure to go, insubordinate conduct towards an NCO on two separate occasions, and failed dorm room inspections.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her 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