AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

•	NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AIC

TYPE GEN

YES	No
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AJllD OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x
x

ISSUES

A94.53

INDEX NUMBER

A67.IO

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

08 Jan 2004	FD-2003-00469

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.

,.......	J0.	4L......... _. ,	,. 	 	 	

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, lRD 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 N UJ\.-IBER

FD-2003-00469	

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 the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

Applicant received a general discharge for minor disciplinary infractions.  He had received  an Article  15, five L etters of Reprimand, three  Records  ofl ndividual  Counseling and  an Unfavorable  Information  File. His miscond uct included five instances of failure to go, failure to obey an order, twice failing to clean his dormitory room, disrespect to a noncommissioned officer, and stealing military property. Member had two Enlisted Performance Reports, both rated an overall "3." They noted his unacceptable off-duty conduct, and inability to maintai n dress and appearance standards as well as the standards in his room. Furthermore, the medical records disclosed member had been diagnosed at various times with a  depressive disorder and occupational problems with narcissistic and schizotypal features. At the time of the discharge processing, member waived his right to consult counsel or submit statements in his own behalf. The DRB opined that through the unit's many administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior a nd was u nwilling o r u nable t o d o s o. T he Board concluded the m isconduct w as a s ignificant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was therefore found to be appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural a nd substantive r equirements o f t he d ischarge r egulation a nd w as w ithin t he d iscretion o f t he 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	

_.

•