------------. -- - --·
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

TYPE GEN

PERSONAL APPEARANCE	-

NAME OF SERVJCE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MJDDLE INITIAL)

NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

GRADE	AFSNIS.5AN
11 llfllT
x	RECORD REVIEW
AJ>l>USSAND OR ORGANIZA l'ION OF CO!JNSJ:L

YES ·
i	I

TTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x	
					x	
					x	
					x	
					x	

MEMBER SI

	
ISSUl:s	A94.ll A93.31 A93.15	INDEX NUMBER	A67.90	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		l	APPLICATlON FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER  OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNliL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO lliE BOARD
E	B
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	

14 Apr l004	CASE NIJMBJ:R

FD-lO()l..0348			

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

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.	

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANOOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECUIAR.Y OJt TID: AIR FORCE P.ERSONNltL COUNCIL
AIRfOBO: DISCllAJl<a REVIEW BOARD
1    Ct'IM!llA:ND DR.UWING, 3JlD Ji'LOOR
AMDHl:WS AFB,MD 111'1M2

AFHQ FORM 0.1077. JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2002-0348	
GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was scheduled for a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) at Fort Gillem, Georgia, in April 2004, but failed to respond to formal notification of the hearing date and did not request a postponement.

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.

Issues 2 and 3.  Applicant contends he was treated unfairly and disciplined due to his ethnic and sexual background.  The records indicated the applicant was discharged for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline after receiving two Articles 15, a vacation of suspended punishment, an Unfavorable Information File, and a referral "1" Enlisted Performance Report documenting misconduct.  His infractions included wearing an earring on a military installation, two incidents of underage drinking, and driving while under the influence of alcohol.  Applicant's two EPRs both documented his poor judgment, apparent inability to adapt to military life, and Jack of improvement after counseling.  At the time of the discharge, applicant consulted counsel and submitted a statement requesting retention, or in the alternative, an honorable discharge.  The ORB was unable to find merit in applicant's claim of ethnic or sexual bias against him, and opined that through the unit's multiple administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunity to change his
negative behavior.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate.

Issues 1 and 4.  Applicant infers his discharge was too harsh because it was based on an isolated incident and he was not given a chance to prove himself in the work section.  However, the record indicates the discharge was based on repeat misconduct and no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was found in the records review.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were its basis and applicant's misconduct appropriately characterized his term of service.

Ifhe can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board.  Ifhe should choose to exercise this right, the applicant should be prepared to provide the ORB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.

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