••
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE GEN

AMN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW

No

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATJON	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

YES
x

11a1..-ctt•.

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.53

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

l	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

17 Jun 2004	FD-2004-00106

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_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,

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-2004-00106	

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:  Upgrade of discharge is 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: Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. The records indicated the applicant received two Articles 15, five Letters of Reprimand, and five Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct. His infractions included eight incidents of being late for work, failure to go, or leaving his duty section without permission. He also lost his line badge at least twice, had two incidents of dereliction of duty, multiple instances of misuse of a government vehicle, a failed dormitory room inspection, and a dress and appearance violation. After evaluation by the Mental Health staff regarding member's habitual lateness, it was only determined he had a further unspecified occupational problem. The DRB opined that through the unit's many administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior and was unable or unwilling to do so. The Board further noted member was age 19 to 21 at the time of his misconduct, the same age as other first-term airmen who successfully complete their enlistments without misconduct. And, there was no evidence applicant was immature or didn't know right from wrong. The Board concluded his misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was thus 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