:· -

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
'AME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

x

TYPE GEN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

RECORD REVIEW

1:..i.:	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION --
YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

X*

x

X*

x

X*
-------------------  ,_,.,,-_,,.-'-,--.--	-+--   .,..,,,_,-..,,-.,,0 --,,,-,..,.,7·" -	-.. ,7"·"""71

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

:;:,_ &: A :  ,i ::.:-_ _._;w    '{'	Jl!! ,--1.l·llr : Jl;:e'::l-QJ\M:f --- ·:··;·-_,--,- ;,,_.'.; r/:-'
1	ORDER APPOI NT_f NG_T_ H_ E_ B_ O_ A R D
1
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DlSCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

4	BRIEF OF PERS_O:-NN E_L_F_IL_E

--------i

COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

26 Nov 2003	FD-2003-00344

Case heard at Wash ington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

* Change Reason and Authority to Secretarial Authority.

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
ISJS 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-2003-00344	

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 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.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s and a Vacation action under the UCMJ. The first Article 15 was for making personal calls during duty hours and the second one was for failure to go. 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 should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief