AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

AlC
x	RECORD  REVIEW

AIJPRl':SS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

x

x

x

ISSUES

A94.05

ISDEX NUM!lER

A62.00

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPUCA TION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL PILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADD!TlONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDINU OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE

13 May 2010

CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-00038

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 A FBCMR.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's req uest

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGK REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, Et: WING, JRD FLOOR ANllREWS AFB, MD 20761·7001

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

CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW B"OARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2009-00038

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 and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade ofthe discharge.

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 a Letter of Reprimand and Memorandum for Record for miscond uct.  Her misconduct included making a false statement on enlistment documentation, failure to obey an order and being disrespectful.
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.

CONCLUSION: 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 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 and detem1ines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief