AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

 	

TYPE

YES	No
x

x	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

MEMBER SITTING

RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES	A94.05

INDEX NUMBER	A67.90

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
1	
HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF

20 Oct 2003

FD2002-0037

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE

Case heard at the Air Reserve Personnel Center; Denver, CO

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

.'----------------------------------------------------------------	------	-------
''·---------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------'
':--
'

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 I535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0037	

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

The applicant appeared before the Board without counsel at the Air Reserve Personnel Center; Denver, Colorado, on 20 Oct 03.

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 an Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand, and four Letters of Counseling for  misconduct.  His misconduct included multiple bad checks, failure to pay his government credit card, disobeying a direct order, making a false statement, failure to clean dorm room, dereliction of duty, exhibiting a bad attitude, being difficult with an NCO, unruly/rude conduct towards an NCO and displaying a negative attitude. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. 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