_.	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

I	NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
. atDIUILIJIJla •
TYPE GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x

x x x
x
----------------------------- --------------------------

SSUES

A93.21

INDEX NUMBER

A67.50

A93.09	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	CASE NUMBER

10 Feb 2004	FD-2003-00452

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.

'	.
,------------------------------------	-----------------11------------------------------------------------------   '
'	'
'

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF IBE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD 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-2003-00452	

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.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for a pattern of misconduct. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a vacation of suspended punishment, two Letters of Reprimand, and a Letter of Counseling for misconduct. His offenses all concerned being late for work or failure to go. Applicant now contends he was distracted by personal problems such as his mother-in-law's heart attack, being geographically separated from his wife and daughter, and a potential divorce. Applicant states his First Sergeant sent him to see a doctor who prescribed a medication for depression. Unfortunately, applicant's medical records were unavailable to the DRB for review. While the Board notes it is understandable that a member experiencing personal problems has additional stress, the applicant has not shown how his problems were unique.
Additionally, the Board concludes there is insufficient evidence to evaluate the merits of applicant's alleged mitigating factors.  After examining the records, the DRB concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and that the discharge was procedurally proper and equitable.  Thus no change is warranted; 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