'	AIR FORCF: UISCHA l{GE RF.VI EW BOA RLl HEA R ING RECORD

j   AME OF Sf RVICE MEMBER {!.AST, FIRST MlllDLE INJTIA I ;

GRA.11>:	AFSNISSAN

1fTJllllF II	;I  "

um

I	A l C
ITYl'i GEN	·1	PERSONAL    APPEARAN(:E
   :	-S.ni:::: ._ NAM£ Of t'(}HN!'- :1. AND on ORt:,;ANl:f.'1.TION	• I YES		Nfl
x

MEMBER SITTIN<;

l

i
-I

. - -± _jj 	
l)K;-;r.R APl"Oj !:fNG TJ IE H(?AD	,     --=- ---=/

A93.09

A67.10

!'lXlfllJl'fS SUBl\liTf r.ll'TOTfl BOARD

2	APPLJCA'J..10 FOR Hl-:VlTI\V OF IS	I'

... ·	" -----·	--	----	-

JLETTcR <lr NO f!HC ATION	-,
4	BRJCF or PERSON'iEL Ell.lo	I

'"----..-

04 May 2005

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

-(;{JlfNSC_L_"S_H.-:1.Et\SE T(} Tl-I-E_D__l. l{l)---·· --- '
Al>DIT!ONAl.VX  IIB!TS s(J[j;,11r1"'' l\t TIMF·m·-­
PEH.SONAL  APPEARANCE
-r---	- ---· ·-- --·· ·--·
TArr: RECt)RDJNO  \}F PERS<)NAI.  Af'PFAR A NC[

i
I

Adv ise applicanl of the decision of the Hoard, the right to a personal appearance w ith/wi thonl counsel. and lh<: right to
submit an appli"ation to th i\FnCMR

Names a nd votes will be made a vai lable to the applicant al the applicant's req uest.

-	----	----	
'"	'-,'\}1 1H.BI{		
5:>(l C ::;:·1 RErT V·:'LS'f. Sl l l lE 40
f{ANDOLPH AFB. TX 78l51.l-17·t2
I	 	

INDORSf:MJ'NT

I    l"ttPi\t.

I>;\TE: 514/Wfio

.'\l<i'l-1.f.TAl'lY (W I n: ;\IR J·OIH"f' l'l\RS(.r'll?'l'l r ( orr>cu
All J'IJlH.'t. lllSCll \F(I,, IU.\'lf.W 6Q.>.  1J
1 5J5 f;H:<.t J,\ N D OR. t:: \\·1KG, JJ!D 1' LOOk
'\J'lllllU "'·AFD, M il !0761 ?!Jl)l

A FHQ FORM 0-2077, ,J.'> N 00	Prcviou edi tion will hi:.· t1s.ed

AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW HOARD DECISIONAL RATIONAJ.F.	

FD-2004-00259	

GENERAL; The applicant appeals for upgrad e oi' d ischarge to honorable and change the reason and authority for the discharge.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Bi.mrd (DRil) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available p!:!rlincnt data on lhc applicant am! the factors leading to the di scharge.

FI N DIJ\GS:  Upgnide of discharge and change of reason and autho1ity for discharge arc denied.

The 13oard finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substant iates an ine<juily or impropriety that would justif y a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant docs not contest his discharge. He stales that he did not like the path he was on and made some serious mistakes.  Applicant also states that he was not performi ng in the joh that he signed up
for.  The records  indicated  the applicant received  five  1 .cttcrs of Rep1imand, three  I .cttcrs or Counseling, and
one Record of Individ ual Counseling for various miscond uct including bei ng late for duty, dereliction of duty, missi ng appointments, linancial ilTesponsi bility, showing up for work unshaven and fail ure to obey an order. The DR B opined that through t hese administrative actions, the applicant had ample opport unities lo change his negative behavior. Although the applicant may have been pcrfonning in a job other than what he signed up l(lr, he still knew right from wrong regardless of what _job he was doing. The 13oard concluded the miscond uct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all mili tary members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board cor1cludcs that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substanti ve rcquirerrH:nts of the di;;charge regulation and was within the discretion of t he discharge authority arid that the applicant was provided  ful l  administrative due process.

Jn view of 1.he fr1rcgoing findings the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge   hou ld not  be changed.

Allachmcnt:
Ex Jminer's Brief