AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOA RD HEARING RECORD
i"AMt OF SERVICt MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARAN CE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL ANO OR ORCANIZ.\TION	ADDRESS ANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x

....

....

....

VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER SITTING	l!ON	OEN	UOTl lC	OTl IER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x x x

-
x
ISSUES	A94.53	INDEX NUM B&R	A67. 10	EXHIBITS SUBMlTTED TO TH'.E  BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
LEHER OF NOTIFICATION
BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEAS E TO THE BOARD ADDlTIONAL EXHlBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARA NCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llE.ARISC DATE	CASE NlMBER

30 Apr 2015	FD-2012-00648
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND ThlE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DJSCUSSCD 0'.< THE ATrACtlED N R. FORCE DISCHARGE R.l!VIJlW BOARD DECISIONAL l\Al10NAL6

Case heard in Wash ington. D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/withou t counsel, and the right to subm it an appl ication to the AFBCMR.

(b)(6)	-

INOORSEMENT	DA TE: 619/2015
TO:	FROM :
SAFfMRBR	S£CJU:TARV OF'rHE AlR FORCE P€RSONN£L couC1L
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	ISJS COMMAND OR, EE WINC, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	AN DREWS AFB.MD !076! 7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2012-00648	

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

ISSUE: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted . In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption , to include evidence submitted by the applicant.  The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant's record of service included one Article 15, two Letters of Admonishments, two Letters of Reprimand and two Letters of Counseling. Her misconduct included failing to go to duty on time (2x's); with intentions to deceive, made false official statement to SNCO; wrongfully appropriated shirt and shoes, the property of another airman; failing to return to duty on time (3x's) failing to attend mandatory PT (2x's) and failing to process evaluations and conduct end of day security check for section and safe.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of her discharge.  The applicant does request an upgrade to discharge due to it being five years since her discharge.  She also stated that she's a single mother and an upgrade would provide a better lifestyle for her and her family. The Board opined that through the administrative actions taken, 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 warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  After a thorough review of the record, the Board found no evidence to justify  an upgrade of the discharge characterization.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief