.jr-

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

r-	-----j

-.	--,
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE  GEN	I

PERSONA L APPEARANCE

AB	-

I

x	RECORD REVIEW

i"""":C·• O·- :,,2J;;.l:l·:i·_-'J   A:\'IE OF COUNSEL  AND OR ORGAJ'HZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS A:.lD OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

GEN

UOTHC

'	'·.·
OTHER	DENY
x

.	x
x x x

ISSUES

A94.05

[ DEX NUMBER

A67.90

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 DATE	CASE NUMBER

09 Dec 2004	FD-2004-00351

Case heard at Washi ngton, 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

-:..··-----····-----····-----····-----····-----····-----····-----····---/_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _l-----····-----····-----··	1

TO:

'•
SAF/MRBR

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL  COUNCJL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEVt' BOARD

550 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

1535 COMMAND OR, EE Wl G, 3RD FLOOR
ANDRE\VS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)	Previous edition \Vi ii be used

.
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE

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

CASE NUJ\1BER

FD-2004-00351

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 denied.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Vacation action under the UCMJ, three Letters of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling for misconduct. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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