AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATlON OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

----- - - - ------ - - - ------ - - - ------ - - - ------ - - -	-----------t----+-----+-----t-----+---   1
x
x x x x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.50

L--	!l!!i!	i'lii P! i•W
1	ORDER APPO!NT!NG 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 APPEARA,'JCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

09 Apr 2004	FD-2004-00026

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

.

.,.:- ------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----1...tt..A •.e_ _ ,._ J_ _ .., _ _ _ L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _;.,_	I

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCU.. AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING, JRD 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-2004-00026	

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 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: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and he is now in the Army National Guard. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling. In addition, he received a Vacation action under the UCMJ. The fact that the applicant is now in the Army National Guard does not negate the misconduct which characterized his period of service in the Air Force. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. 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