AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE
AB

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

x x x

ISSUES

A92.35
A93.ll A93.0l

INDEX NUMBER

A67.SO

x
x

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

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

19 Jan 2012	FD-2010-00376

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

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:

SAFIMRBR
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, 3RD 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-2010-00376	

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 of the discharge.
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:   Applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of her discharge. Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends that she should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes she made
when she was young and immature. The DRB recognized the applicant was 20 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence she was immature or did not know right from wrong. The record indicates the applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct: Pattern of Misconduct. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 and three Letters of Reprimand. Her misconduct included underage drinking, sleep on duty, insufficient funds to cover check, fail to pay just debt, and failed to go to duty on time. The Board opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her behavior. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no
evidence of impropriety or inequity to w,arrant an upgrade of the discharge.
I

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review' Board eoncludes 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 determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief