AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GIV\.DE

AIC

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x
x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMB!i'.R

A67.50

l	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETI'ER 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

01 Apr 2004	FD2004-00019
.	DlSC!Jl,>SED OJ"! ..
,,,;,J:fe.\ ''-   ;  '	1' ;,  '
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

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

.'='.......	-	------....-.........   ---..........------........--.........   ---.............   -----·..--......------................    --......-....-----..............    ---..................,--------1

TO:

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
!535 CO:ICIMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD t'LOOR 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-Z004_00019	

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Andrews AFB, MD on April I , 2004. The following witness also testified on the applicant's behalf:- his landlord.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5: Applicant's contentions
Exhibit 6: Medical Certificate and Pilot License Exhibit 7: College Transcript
Exhibit 8: Phi Theta Kappa honor Society Letter Exhibit 9: recommendation Letter

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.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand, three Letters of Counseling, and a Vacation action under the UCMJ for various acts of misconduct. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board was sympathetic to the fact that the applicant's fiancee broke up with him right before the scheduled wedding, however, the applicant still knew right from wrong. The Board \Vas also impressed with the applicant's post-service accomplishments, particularly his academic achievements; and also his patriotic zeal to serve his country in the armed forces. However, these factors do not constitute an inequity or an impropriety. The Board 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.

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