.	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
.	NAME  OF SERVICE MEMBER  (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE  INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN 	
AB	111•111
TYPE. GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME Of COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OFTHEQOARD.	.
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
------------------------------------------	x

-

r-o

I-<

I-<

------------------------------------------

x x x
x
... '•

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90	.. ".

>EXHiini:s      UBMI11JDl;TOTHE  )Jq	D •

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

19 May 2004	FD-2004-00088
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'$ DECJS!ONALRATIONAL ARE OlSCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE
, ,-,-  ,
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

,,.

INDORSEMENT	DATE: S/19/2004

---------------------------------------------------------------	-----------------------------------------------------------
TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY Of THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR

RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 78150-4742	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-2004-00088	

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: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Articles  15, three Letters of Reprimand, three Letters of Counseling, four traffic tickets, and a Vacation action under the UCMJ for various acts of misconduct outlined in the examiners brief 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