. .	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD
SSGT	J JIJl I•

NAME OF SERVICE MElllBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AJ\ID OR ORGANIZA TIO:S

X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS A:SD OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

----- ··----- ··----- ··----- ·-----··
ISSUES	A94.06	INDEX NUMBER	A13.00

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER
x x x x x

l	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

DENY

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

14 Jan 2004	FD-2003-00450

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

1

____   ......................................................................WI!..I...,....., 	

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
A!'IDREWS 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-2003-00450	

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:  The Board grants the requested relief.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s from a previous enlistment and then was discharged with a General discharge for unsatisfactory progress on the weight management program.

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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and the reason for the discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief