..
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE  AMN	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL
No
x

MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x
x x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER	A67.10

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

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER	ADDITIONAL  EXHIBITS  SUBMITTED AT TIME OF

28 Oct 2003	FD-2003-00189
\

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE

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

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
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD 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

FD-2003-00189	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, change the reason and authority for the discharge, and change the reenlistment code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) 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, change of reason and authority, and change of reenlistment code 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 for failure to go on four separate occasions, a Vacation action under the UCMJ for failure to go on three occasions, being disrespectful in language and deportment toward a TSgt, and for failing to refrain from wearing civilian clothes and riding in a POV. In addition, he received four Letters of Reprimand for failure to report on three occasions, violation of Phase restrictions, being disrespectful to an NCO, substandard behavior and unprofessional conduct and language. He also received one Letter of Counseling for failure to report and eight AETC Form 341s for various misconduct. 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 sho\Jld not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief