AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

TYPE    GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

GRADE

SRA
x	RECORD REVIEW

AFSN/SSAN

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

x x x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

x x
"',::::"Jtti:
1  ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
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 HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

25 Jun 2009	FD-2008-00203

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.

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00203	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

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 is 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 six Letters of Reprimand, a Letter of Counseling, and two Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  The applicant was administratively disciplined for failure to take her End-Of-Course Exam, failure to meet dress standards, lied about going to an appointment, and failure to report for duty on time (six separate occasions).  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her negative behavior.  The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions she made in her Air Force career. 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 equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief