......... .....,""_"	,_ .._.	-
TYPE
GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X    RECORD REVIEW
NAME Of COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZ.ATION OF COUNSEL

·-
MEMBERS SITTING

x x x

A94.S3,A67.01,A9J.19,

INDIXNUMBER
A67.10

l ORDER APPOIN

BOARD

AOl. 13

02-06-12

I	2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel. DD Form 149 submitted. The case will be forwarded to the AFBCMR for further processing.

SAf'tM!BR-- --
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB. TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AlR FORCE PERSONNEL COUN=C"IL',, 	 .,..  AIR FOR-CE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD	.
1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING, 3RI> FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 2076-:2-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE	BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE

I	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and to change his reenlistment code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board but declined to exercise this right.
The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.
FINDINGS. Upgrade of discharge and change of reenlistment code are denied

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety	justify a change of the discharge.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. had Record of Individual Counseling and three Letters of Reprimand. His misconduct included three instances of underage drinking, two instances of failure to go, one instance of speeding and driving recklessly, resulting in an accident, and assault against a civilian. Member had no Enlisted Performance Reports during his period of service. At the time of the  discharge, applicant consulted counsel and submitted a statement in his own behalf acknowledging it might have been mutually beneficial to he and the Air Force if he were to separate, but noting that an administrative discharge was not appropriate because he disputed the incidents used as it's basis. At the time of the discharge, the Staff Judge Advocate thoroughly addressed these issues in the legal review that accompanied the discharge package to the decision authority. The Board found the personnel and discharge records indicate member was given adequate opportunity to improve and conform his behavior to Air Force standards and was either unwilling or unable to do so. Therefore, no inequity or impropriety was found in his discharge in the course of the records review

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   administrative due process.

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