AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD

. - -·1TIAL)

GRADE

TYPE UOTH	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

AIC

RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON
x

x

x

GEN

x

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

x

ISSUES

A94.06

lNDEX NUMBER

A59.10

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 EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

27 Jan 2005	FD-2004-00230

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, 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.

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78I50-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
15l5 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FWOR
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-2004-00230	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

The applicant appeared before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) with counsel from the VFW.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge to honorable is approved.  Change of reason and authority for discharge is 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 an UOTHC discharge for admitting to being a homosexual. The majority of the Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, however, a UOTHC characterization 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 under the provisions of Title I 0, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief	

-------- -  -   --------------------------- --- -

-----

,