--	--

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE M EMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRDE	A FSN/SSAN 	

SSGT
I	PERSONAL       APPEARANCE	I	RECORD      REVIEW
TY PE uoTHC x
cO_UNsEL'."'-''    NAJ\IE OF COUNSEL ANll OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YES	N11

lvx---r-1.s.1rr1

•1illirz: ;	··:

MEMBER SJTTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

-------- - - - ------ - - ----	----------T:------+----+---t----j	1
x

I
x
x
x x
-.ssu.ES A9 5:01  - -- ;;.,;;.: ;;;;B'-ER	A_6_4_:00 --------r- .-..- . "E'")('"!'lJBJ.Ts"Ji' v,B!,M:-=1.r"• .. ED, T;;*:.•o•."T' !l ".'.B,,l°i'"!\'R."D.·,'.C"'·C"·""c-·.C''C.CI

1

AOl.01	A60   00	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
A00.52	2	A PPLlCATJON FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIM E OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUl\'llJ.ER

21 Apr 2004	FD-2003-00477
A·_'    _P>!.lS,::-1 .S'Q-°P¥d  9	j ·pff_19N¥'MJJO   --:p-°:15-Ep_oN	:A:f:!k.:\ffi roRCE DISCHARGE_ REVIEW f'.IOAJW::OEQSIONAJ. KATI()'.•: - ::_--:: ''.:-f-· >:-_--:- -   -_         7

•-- i - 0,'•'1 '>"<>. ,,,,·,-,, .-<-·0'. -_-,,,-,_  " '•·'"'•'·-·,-• i '>·- -' ','-,  -'";•,- :--::_.,   _-   c '--      _-,

_-_   -  -; --- :·-    - - : "--	. -_- -- -·- •:"·:-0- ,_-,;,,-, ;' -	:

•      - ;,•  -' ;-; -- ,-_ - ,_- -- -     ,	.:,:_   ;-    0

Case heard at Wa'shington, D.C. via video teleconferencing from Fort Gillem, GA  The board met in Washington, D.C.; the applicn( and counsel were present in Fort Gil.lem, GA

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR

;·----- ··-----( ---··----- ··-	-------- ··----- ··----- ··----- ....·····................................····------1

TO:

SAFIM RBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RAN DOLPH AFB. TX 78150-4742

FROM:

SECUTARY  OF TllE AIR  FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD	' 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDRE\VS 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 NUM BER

FD-2003-00477	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable or general. The applicant personally appeared before the Discharge Review Board (DRB).
The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The DRB finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge. After a thorough review of the record and information provided by the applicant, the DRB was unable to identify any basis that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record. The DRB reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge. The records indicated applicant received an under other than honorable conditions service characterization.

At the hearing, the applicant argued that the service characterization was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He believed this to be the case because his misconduct was isolated to the period of time that he and his former wife were having marital problems due to her infidelity.  The records indicated the applicant was involved in three separate incidents of assault, for which two resulted in civilian criminal convictions and one in nonjudicial punishment.  He also received a letter of reprimand for disorderly conduct. During this time, the applicant participated in counseling through social actions and family advocacy.  The DRB opined that through these mechanisms, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The DRB 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.

The applicant also noted his significant post-service activities.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and contributing meaningfully to society.  However, no inequity or impropriety in	
his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The DRB concluded the misconduct of
the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

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.	1

Attachment: Examiner's Brief