AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FilST MIDDLE INITIAL)
i	1 1TWW••
TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
AlC	I 1311111 IU I
x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

l- C\O""U-,Nr-S_EL -1 NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

VOTE OFTHEBOARD

...

'' '

c '!
'
' ''

MEMBER SITTING

HON

x x x x
x

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

'-------------------------------------

ISSUES

A94.06

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

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

30 Jun 2004	FD-2004-00113

··...

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

/'
,Sl!.'NA.Ul.ll.li'.<llU>EB. - - - ••_.,_ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• liirnoFJifi1iliil J'ru:.51.11F.:r:n:. L........_-:o::::;;:_ -••••••••
4'
'

'

'
L

TO:

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

FROM:

DATE:  6130/2004

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-2004-00113	

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.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon  the  record  and  evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUE:  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article l 5s, a Record of Individual Counseling and one Memorandum for Record for misconduct.  The DRB opined that the issuance of a Memorandum for Record and subsequent discharge less than four months prior to the applicant's term of enlistment was too harsh.

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 discharge and should be changed under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief