AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

YES	No
x

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AB
x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x
x

ISSUES

A94.53

INDEX NUMBER

A67. 10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

08 Dec 2004	FD-2003-00528

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 .

..----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- ....----- -.,_	,

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
153.5 COMMAND DR, EE WJNG, 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 NU1\1BER

FD-2003-00528

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.

ISSUE:

Applicant contends after completing technical training school he was told by his commanding officer he was not going to meet the criteria to be a good service member and was given a general discharge and sent home. Additionally, the member states he was singled out in basic training because someone thought he was a homosexual.  The records reflect the applicant received one Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand, one Memorandum  for Record, three AETC Form 34ls, and 9 AETC Forms  l73s.  His misconduct included failure to go, uniform violations, failed room inspection, late to formation three times, late to class on two occasions, failed unit tests and sleeping in class, refusal and failure to run physical conditioning test, fighting another airman, leaving marching formation without permission and refusing to reenter, and disrespect towards an NCO.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board noted applicant was the same age as other airman on their first enlistment who properly adhere to standards and complete their service without a record of misconduct.  Applicant failed to provide any documented evidence to substantiate his contentions, and lacking such evidence to the contrary, the Board relies on the presumption of regularity and finds the discharge proper and without basis for an upgrade.  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