-

,.	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE GEN

AMN
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANJZATION OF COUNSEL

x

I
-·  MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

-----------------------------------------      ·	1
'	x
x x
x x

ISSUES

A93.0l A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67. 10	'·;-...''!I:   ..,;
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-2004-00263

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 78IS0-4742

SECRETARY OF TIIE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DlSCIIARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMA.!'<D DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS A'8, 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-2004-00263	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but failed to respond to the notification letter by the required date.

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

FINDINGS:	Upgrade  of discharge,  change  of reason  and  authority  for  discharge,  and  change  of reenlistment code are 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.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand, seven Letters of Counseling, and two verbal counselings for misconduct. Most of his infractions involved failure to go or being late to work; he also had an incident of financial irresponsibility, speeding, and unsatisfactory performance. The DRB opined that through the unit's many administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior and was unable or unwilling to do so. The Board concluded his repeated misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and the characterization of the discharge was appropriate.

Issue 2. Applicant notes that he made a few mistakes when young and immature. The DRB noted the applicant was 20 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was as old as the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct and successfully complete thgeir enlistments without misconduct. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to his misconduct.

Issue 3. The applicant cited his desire to return to military service as justification for upgrade. While the Board was sympathetic to the impact his reenlistment code was having on the applicant, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

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