AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

ITIAL)

GRADE

SRA

PERSONAL     APPEAKANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

(

HON	GEN
x
x

x

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

x x

ISSUES

A94.06

INDEX NUMBER

A67. 10

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 EXHI  ITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING  DATE	CASE  NUMBER

10 Feb 2005	FD-2004-00165

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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AlR 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-2004-00165

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, change the reason and authority for the discharge, and 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 is approved.  Change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.
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 characterization for discharge inequitable.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Letters of Reprimand and six Records oflndividual Counseling for minor disciplinary infractions. The last three instances of misconduct were all addressed using the Record of Individual Counseling (RIC). The purpose of a RIC is to, give the applicant a "warning" that he is straying off the course that the Air Force wants members to take and that further misconduct will be handled with a more severe punishment, such as, Letters of Admonishment, Letters of Reprimand, or non-judicial punishment under the UCMJ via an Article 15. Although the DRB did not condone the applicant's misconduct, after a thorough review of the applicants record, the majority of the DRB opined that the discharge characterization was too harsh and that the applicant's overall service was honorable based on his time served, his APRs, his overall performance and his post-service conduct.

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