AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

AB
RECORD REVIEW

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.ll A92.15 A93.07 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
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

IIEARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

17 Feb 2004	FD-2003-00339

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.

------·-

Iar:::zcA c. l

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781504742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
lSJS COMMAND DR, EE 'WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB,	20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2003-00339	
GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable and to change his reenlistment code.

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB),  without  counsel,  at Andrews AFB, MD, on February 17, 2004.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:
Exhibit 6:	Character Letter from	a  plicant's current civilian supervisor, dated February 12, 2004 Exhibit 7:	Character Letter from		a personal family friend, dated January 13, 2004

It should further be noted that the Board President gave the applicant 2 additional weeks from the date of his appearance to submit additional written materials for the Board members' further consideration. The following additional exhibits were received and considered by the Board:
Exhibit 8:	Statement exc	t	rt  dly prepared by Arnn CP, date unknown Exhibit 9:	Statement by			ated August  15, 2001
Exhibit 10:  Statement by	ed August  13, 2001

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge, and change ofreenlistment code are 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.  Applicant received an under honorable conditions (General) discharge for minor disciplinary infractions.  He had one Letter of Reprimand, and two Articles 15 documenting misconduct consisting of dereliction of duty, mistreating a female subordinate subject to orders by making sexually offensive comments, and failure to go.  Additionally he was non-recommended for promotion, and that memorandum details other areas of dereliction of duty.  Applicant contends the discharge was too harsh because he didn't deserve the Letter of Reprimand or the second Article 15, and the first Article 15 was too severe a punishment for his minor infraction.  He also noted he was undergoing marital problems and his wife was causing him problems in the unit which applicant felt put undue stress on his commander.  Applicant further noted his otherwise satisfactory service and good post-service conduct.  Neither the record review nor applicant's testimony provided merit to applicant's contentions.  Additionally, at the time of the discharge, applicant consulted counsel and waived his right to present his case to an administrative discharge board or submit statements in his own behalf.  Applicant conceded that at that time he was in the middle of a divorce and child custody battle, had an overwhelming loss of focus on his duties, and due to the stress felt it best to accept the discharge and move into civilian life so he could find a job to care for his children.  The Board noted applicant was the same age as other airmen who complete their enlistments without any misconduct, and that he knew right from wrong, and although given the opportunity, he failed to correct his negative behavior.  The Board found insufficient mitigation for his misconduct.  Neither the record nor applicant's testimony offered a basis to substantiate an upgrade or to change his reenlistment code.

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/change of reason for discharge, or to change the reenlistment code, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief