AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

- 1111I 8ff Jill

GRADE

SRA

AFSN/SSAN
I JPPlllL I'.

TYPE GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORCANIZATION

x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDru::ss AND OR ORCANIZATION OF COUNSEL

YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

---------------------------------------0------ -------------+------+------+-----+-----+----1
x
x x x
x
1	---	------------- -& BER- A92.I5--------
A93.07	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

01 Dec 2004	FD-2004-00196

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.

'

--------------------	-----------   ------------..--	-----------'--------------------------------, '
'

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

SECru::TARY OF TRE AIR !'ORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00196	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board 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 applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issue 1. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. During his second enlistment his misconduct included numerous instances of being late to work, a dress and appearance violation, financial irresponsibility, an unsatisfactory performance. At the time of the discharge, applicant consulted counsel and submitted a waiver of his right to an administrative discharge board hearing conditioned upon receipt of no less than a general discharge. The request was  approved. Member waived his right to submit any additional statements in his own behalf Applicant now contends his former wife created hardships for him that led to their divorce, and which caused him to be depressed and resulted in his misconduct. Although the record does reflect that member was seen at the mental health clinic and was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features, including depression, as well as immature and impulsive behavior, the board found this of insufficient mitigation or extenuation to explain member's misconduct. The applicant's problems were not unique, and his diagnosis was not one that indicated he was unable to perform his duties or adhere to standards. Thus the Board concluded that member  was responsible for his actions of misconduct and was held accountable for those. He was counseled repeatedly and given  numerous opportunities to  improve his behavior but failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. Because member was apparently unable to separate his personal problems from his duties, he became an administrative burden to his unit. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

Issue 2.  Applicant cited he received a good conduct medal and a letter of appreciation while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports and other accomplishments.  His last Enlisted Performance Report was an overall referral "2" that documented his loss of initiative and productivity, and marginal performance.  He had also had his noncommissioned officer status vacated.  The Board found the seriousness of the applicant's willful misconduct and these
negative aspects of his record offset any positive aspects of his duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were its basis.

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