AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
AIC	I 1 •IJ11•f  .

TYPE GEN	x	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE

I	RECORD    REVIEW

·.>> NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGAN!ZA TION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING
(--------------------------------------:
''
!
I
''
''
t.............................J

HON

x x x

x

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

x

ISSUES

A94.06

INDEX NUMBER

A49.00	I. >   1 ;: ,,,••	1ur!1'	tl! lB!f} 9	:·t ·...·.. . .> ,
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 APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

18 May 2004	FD-2004-00060

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

. .··..

TO:

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

FROM:

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-2004-00060	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

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:  The Board grants the requested relief.

ISSUE:  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received two Letters of Reprimand and two Letters of Counseling and was discharged for unsatisfactory performance, mainly for making a comment about using his weapon on his supervisor if provoked.  According to the records, the comment was made in response to a question by a mental health advisor.  Also, the member's supervisor made a similar comment about "going postal" and only received a verbal counseling.

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.

However,  in  view  of  the  foregoing  findings,  the  Board  further  concludes  that  the  overall  quality  of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable characterization.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief