AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

SRA	·tlllmlllr
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

CW !fSEJili :.y NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON
x x x x
x

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

SSUES

A94.06

INDEX NUMBER

A67.50

,,'>.'::o ,:,UilU;JtS ··	·· · '];Q:	B.y:
1	
13

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

HEARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

09 Sep 2004	FD-2004-00258
\f;;	J;:rs1s	lfwl6	¥	,;J?	-F!tRt i:tiit21:,1r;, : ?8 1	'.(¥i:,.;;i:';•.· ''Pc; ··. ·
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

.-------------J'------------------------------------------------ ·----------------------------------------------- ..
...:-

TO:

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

, 4'L'·"f;, ,_  «f,:' ': ,::' y:t;: ' ; -.
FROM:
SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR 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

CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE     FD-2004-00258

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

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 to the Reason and Authority for discharge is denied.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Article l Ss, three Letters of Reprimand, and two Letters from the Commander for various acts of misconduct. The Board noted that the applicant was processed for discharge subsequent to successfully completing correctional custody despite no additional evidence of misconduct. The Board opined this action appeared to be contrary to the rehabilitative purpose of correctional custody. Further, the Board took into consideration the apparent spiteful behavior of a SNCO towards the applicant. While the Board does not condone the applicant's misconduct, the Board found the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant to be inequitable when taking into consideration the length and quality of the applicant's remaining service as documented in the applicant's service record.

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