AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
• lr 11111

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
	mn11m11

TYPE GEN

YES	No
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A92.21 A93.0l A93.07

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

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

23 Jan 2004	FD-2003-00533

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 .

...--- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - - -- -- - _) _ ----- - - - - ------------- - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- -...

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUJliCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB. MD 20762- 7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-VZ)	Previous edition will be used

CASE  NUI\.IBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2003-00533

GENERAL:	The applicant appeals for upgrade  of discharge to honorable, to authority for the discharge, and to change his reenlistment code.

change the reason and

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) 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,  change  of  reason  and  authority  for  discharge,  and  change  of reenlistment code are 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 minor disciplinary infractions. The records indicated the applicant received two Articles 15, five Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling, one Record oflndividual Counseling for misconduct, and had two civilian arrests while in the military. His misconduct included a dress and appearance violation, failed dormitory inspections, being unavailable while on stand-by status, misappropriation of government property, assaulting his spouse, lack of military bearing and behavior, fighting in the dormitory, failing to properly position himself as a vehicle spotter and through his neglect causing damage to a government vehicle, sleeping on his post, shoplifting, and trespassing. The ORB opined that through the unit's administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior and was unwilling or unable to do so. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate. The Board found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.

Applicant referenced his post-service activities. The ORB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job.  However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found and this information does not provide the basis for any. The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

The applicant cited his desire to return to military service as justification for upgrade. While the Board commends applicant on this desire and is sympathetic to the impact of his reenlistiment code on the applicant, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety that warrants an upgrade.

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