AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
, NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST 11DDLE INITIAL)	GR4.DE

AFS'1/SSAN

TYPE GEN

YES	NCI
x

I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COL' NSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

A JC
x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORG;\NIZA TJON OF COUNSEL

-	·.··	. vort (}F.TIIE B<');\RD	.·.

MEMBER  SITTING

1
HON

_,-----· ·---·

-0"---	·--·-'------------

··---- ··----- ··----- ··

,

GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DEN Y
x x x x
x

···----- ··----- ··----- ··----- ··---

ISSUES

A93.0l A94.05

INDEX NUMB[R

A67.10

]	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW or DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTlFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL "S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXH IBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARlNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

23 Jul 2004

FD-2004-00182

····	··	··	..  cc
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 .

• • ----- ••.c.i. ----- •••• ----- •••• ----- •••• ----- •••""1,.. - - -	- - - - - - •••• - - - - - •••• - - - - - •••• - - - - - •••• - - - - - •••• - - - - - •••• - - - - - •	-------!
''
••••----•••••••••••••,.••••••,..•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••	'I

1

f'''-;_",-·,,-;-;;fBrLk.t,,110::L!"2/C-;GUff  ?"i\"'';i":1;L,'"2ifo:r1i'!  :wi2iiiz:l':mNw:"1'E1m2=2-;";,25+\ 2-: E"°""''' -;d";ii'"';F'"!!"&\;';°j__;;;:'"""·· ¥£c'S----:;";L;,:;_ q···-    "" ""!' ··=	· ---"'""' ';",.;--:-SF,J±;; :: G-:-;h=.;: : : [j:! ;.<> :- ·	"=

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COU NCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW' BOARD
1535 COMMAND  DR, EE WING, 3RD FJ,QOR ANDRE\-'\-'S AFB. MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition '"'ill be used

f

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUJ\:JBER

FD-2004-00182	

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 that neither  the evidence  of record  nor that provided  by  the  applicant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand, and two Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  The misconduct included late for duty, inappropriate comments of a sexual nature, physical posturing so as to intimidate, threatening statements, deliberately grabbing a co-worker, verbal abuse and creating a hostile work environment, disorderly conduct, and involvement in a physical altercation at work. 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.

Issue 2.  Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when young. The DRB noted the applicant was 25 years of age when the discharge took place.  There is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

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