AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

, NAV- fE OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AlC

•11111111

TYPE

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

X	RECORD REVIEW

,I	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

YES
x

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x

ISSUES	A94.06	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	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE	
HEARING DATE

06 Dec 2003	CASE NUMBER

FD-2003-00197			

Case heard at Randolph AFB, Texas.

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

TO:

SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

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

FD2003-00197	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contns available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:   Upgrade of discharge to Honorable is denied.

The Board  finds that neither  the evidence of record  nor that provided  by the  applicant  substantiates  an impropriety that would justify upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE:  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because "it was too harsh".  The information provided by the applicant and contained in his records was carefully reviewed by the DRB.  The records indicated the applicant received one Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand, and seven Records of  Individual Counseling and two Letters of Admonishment.  The misconduct included absent without leave, late for mobility processing, late for duty, failure to go, dereliction of duty, failure to follow instructions, failed dress and appearance standards and failure to report.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The DRB recognized the fact that the applicant had served six years total service before the discharge was initiated, but concluded the applicant's misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his time in the Air Force.  The Board noted the applicant was entitled to request an administrative discharge board but chose not to
exercise this right.  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, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief