.- , 	

A_IR__F_O_R_C_E D_1s_c_H_A_R_G_E R_E_v_1_EW B_O_A_RD H_E_A_R_IN__G_R_E_c_o_RD--.	--1

:-!AME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

TYPE GEN	PERSONAL APPEARANCE

GRADE

AMN
x

AFSN/SSAN

RECORD REVIEW

YES	No
x

;'\!AME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COU-"ISEL

MEMBER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x
'	x
---- ··----- ··----- ··----- ··

JSSUES

A93.0l

INDEX NTMBER

A67.00

I	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 DA TE	CASE   Nl'MBER

14 Dec 2004	FD-2004-00220

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 78I 50-4742

AFHQ FORM 0-2077,JAN 00

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE  PERSO!'iNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
155 COMMAND DR. EE \\'ING,  lRD FWOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 2076:!-700?

(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

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

CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00220

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) 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: Applicant was discharged for misconduct. Although member's discharge processing files and medical records were unavailable to the Board for review due to being missing from the record, the Board was aware that member had three Articles 15. One was for underage drinking at San Antonio, TX while assigned to Brooks AFB, one was for drunk driving while assigned to Aviano AB, Italy, and the third was for failure to go, also while assigned to Aviano AB. Because member's discharge file was unavailable to the Board for review, the Board was unable to determine if any additional misconduct on member's part formed part of the basis for the discharge. The Board also could not determine if member consulted counsel or submitted statements on his own behalf at the time of the discharge. When requested to provide  any pertinent information he may have about the discharge file or his record of service, applicant failed to respond. Applicant noted while in the service he was young and immature and being assigned overseas contributed to him acting out in a disruptive way. The Board noted applicant was over the age of 19 when discharged, essentially the same age as other airman on their first enlistments who properly adhere to standards and complete their service without a record of misconduct. Applicant failed to provide any documented evidence to substantiate his contentions, and lacking such evidence to the contrary, the Board relies on the presumption of regularity and finds the discharge proper and without basis for an upgrade. No inequity or impropriety could be found in the records available for review.

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