AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING .RECORD

NAME OF !\ERVICE 1\.-fEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

!  GRADE

M'SN/SSA.

nu r u
TYPE

T'J	lb

I  AlC

lit,•••

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

YES

AM.IIQ,f COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZA-=T-=lO=N-

---------+1 -A.DDR=Ess A.,N.,=D-oa'""o'"a"-G=-A.NlZA=TIoNo=F=c-=o=UN=s
I

o	i

MEMBERS SITTING
X* X* X* X*

I   A92.22,A94.06

INDEX NUMJlElt
A64.00

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

HF.ARING llATE

CASE NIIMDER

LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
I 4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

03 12 05

FD00-00142	COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO lHE BOARD
ADDITIONAL £XHl1:!1TS SUBMITTED AT TlME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

REMARKS
Case heard at Randolph AFB, TX

* Secretary Authority

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

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

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

•   ·.     •.•c,'P'  >
"'b,_,;...l'J;_';,.,,,;'·t.•N,"f.>•t:

SECRETARY OF TIIB AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WINO, 3llD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
Previo_u_s_e_di-t1·on will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASI!NUMBER

FD0000142	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of his March 1, 1996 discharge from General to Honorable, to change the reason for the discharge, and to change his reenlistment code.  The applicant requested to appear before the Board but was unable to appear as requested.  The Board considered his request for upgrade on December 5, 2003.

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data and factors leading to the applicant's discharge. FINDINGS:   The applicant's request is APPROVED.
Issues: The applicant conten. ds that his general d1scharge was inequitable.  and too harsh because the allegations of his discharge are mitigated and do not reflect the proper characterization of his service. The record indicates that  the  applicant  was discharged  for misconduct  (civilian  conviction  and  discreditable  involvement  with
military or civilian authorities) after receiving two letters of reprimand and an Article 15 within a six-month period. The applicant contends that his LOR for leaving his post is mitigated by the fact that his physical condition at the time necessitated immediate relief to allow him to use the restroom. The Board found this reason credible. Further, the applicant's record indicates that although he plead no contest to a charge of domestic battery involving his girlfriend and was found guilty by the court, the applicant's sentence was deferred for 180 days on unsupervised probation, after which time the charge would be dismissed. While the Board agrees that such a finding of guilty may be used as a basis for discharge, the later dismissal of the charge minimizes any impact that such a charge should have on the characterization of the applicant's service. Finally, the applicant's post-service activity has included successful college and preparation to attend medical school.

CONCLUSIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludes that the applicant's 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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge instead of General. The applicant's discharge characterization should therefore be changed to Honorable and the reason for discharge changed to Secretary Authority  under  the provisions  of Title  I O>  USC  1553.   The applicant's reenlistment  code should remain	

unchanged.

Attachment: Exam.i,nr's Brief Case File