AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
rn	z u rn ra

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AB

TYPE GEN

YES	No
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANJZATION

x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

A93.21	A67.10

------- ··----- ··----- ··----- ···
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER

HON	GEN	UOTHC

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x
x

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 APPEARANCE

HEARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

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.

------------------ -----_)_ _L)_ _ _     _ _/}__ _	_ _ _ _ _   ,_,_ _ , _ _    j_ _ _ _ ,_	_ _ _ _ _	_ _ _ _ _ _,.

TO:

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DJSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
A:-.DREWS 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 !\'UMBER

FD-2004-00013	

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

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,  change  of  reason   and  authority  for  discharge,   and  change  of reenlistment code are denied.

ISSUE:

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant provides a sufficient basis in clemency for a change of discharge.

Issue.  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh; he noted he had been seeking treatment for insomnia.  The records indicated the applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary  infractions after receiving two Articles  15, three Letters of Reprimand, three Records oflndividual Counseling for misconduct, and one traffic ticket.  His infractions consisted of nine instances of failure to go
or being late to work, failure to complete his career development course on time, and failure to obey an order to get a haircut.  While the record did show that member had sought medical assistance for sleep difficulties, it indicated he had been instructed on how to improve his sleep hygiene and had been prescribed medications to aid his sleep patterns.  He was never given a diagnosis that warranted a medical evaluation board or rendered him unfit for duty.  He was also at one time diagnosed with an adjustment disorder, and subsequently occupational problems, but these were not unfitting either.  The DRB opined that member had
it within his own ability to correct his negative behavior and was unwilling to do so.  Through the unit's administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to show improvement.  The Board concluded  his misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and there was no evidence member was immature or did not know right from wrong.  Member was of the same age as most first term airmen who successfully complete their enlistments without misconduct.  The board found no basis for and inequity or impropriety that warranted an upgrade, and found the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was 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