-l
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

Atc	
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

A67.90

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFJCA TION
4	BRIEF 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

12 May 2004	FD-2004,.00014

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 COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 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 NUMBER

FD-2004-00014	

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.

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:

Issue.  Applicant was discharged for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline; the records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand, a Letter of Counseling, a Letter of Admonishment, and four Memorandums for Record due to misconduct.  His infractions included multiple instances of being late to work, various dormitory violations, violating Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) requirements, disobeying a lawful order, and making a false statement.  Member failed to reply to any of the written disciplinary actions, and at the time of the discharge, member waived his right to consult counsel and submit statements in his own behalf.  The record also disclosed that member had a student training report wherein he had been counseled for a disrespectful attitude, and he was permanently decertified from PRP  due to his "contemptuous attitude toward the law and duly constituted authority."   The DRB opined that through the unit's many 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 applicant cited his desire to return to military service as justification  for upgrade.  While the DRB commends applicant on this desire and was sympathetic to the impact his reenlistment was having on the applicant, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which 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