AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
ITJAL)	GRADE

TYPE GEN

AB
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW

-,- ' . 'j::OJ.H !$-->>''   NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS Al\D OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x
x x

-ISSUES

A94.53 A94.05

INDEX NL:MBER

A67.10

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 SUBM ITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

01 Feb 2005	FD-2004-00352

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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

/

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVJE\V BOARD
1535 COMJlrlAND DR, EE WING. 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, .MD 20762-70D2

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition'vill be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIE\V BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE Nlll\IBER

FD-2004-00352	

GENERA L:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrad e of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change his reenlistment code.

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

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors lead ing 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.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a vacation of suspended punishment, eight Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Counseling documenting  19 incidents of misconduct.  Most of these involved sleeping on duty, being late to work, failure to go, disrespect to noncommissioned  officers, disobeying orders, and one incident of disorderly conduct.  At the time of the discharge, applicant consulted counsel and submitted a statement on his own behalf requesting retention and asserting that he had served honorably.  He felt the discharge was  a "harsh punishment" for "minor mistakes."   The ORB opined that through the unit's administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior and was unwilling or unable to do so. 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.

Issue 2.  In response to some of the disciplinary actions rendered against him, member had claimed to be seeking medical help for a sleep disturbance.  He did not however raise this issue in his reply to the discharge processing, nor was it raised during the course of his separation physical as there were no medical
bars to his separation.  However, applicant's medical record was not available to the Board for review and in the absence of documented evidence to the contrary, the Board applies the presumption of regularity and finds the discharge proper.  The Board concluded applicant's extensive misconduct appropriately characterized his term of service.

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 fu11 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	

r.	You, who knew or should have known of your duties at or near Sheppard AFB TX, on or about 2 Apr 01, were derelict in the performance of those duties in that you were sleeping in your duty section, as it was your duty not to do.  For this misconduct, you received an LOR on 2 Apr 01.

s.	You, who knew or should have known of your duties at or near Sheppard AFB TX, on or about 22 Mar 01, were derelict in the performance of those duties in that you were sleeping in your duty section, as it was your duty not to do. For this misconduct, you received a LOR on 23 Mar 01.

Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority in support of this recommendation  are attached.  The commander exercising SPCM jurisdiction or higher authority will decide whether you will be discharged or retained in the Air Force and, if you are discharged how your se;rvice will be characterized.  If you are discharged, you will be ineligible for reenlistment  in the Air Force and will probably be denied enlistment in any component of the Armed Forces.  Any special pay, bonus, or education assistance fund may be subject to recoupment.

3.	

You have the right to consult counsel.  Military legal coun assist you.  Ihave made an appointment for you to cons
Defense Counsel, at BLDG 1638, on	\ ?- .."liu.f\ oo	at _		hours.
You may consult civilian counsel at your own expense.

4.	You have the right to submit statements  in your own behalf.  Any statements you want the separation authority to consider must reach me by   t ,Q    .lu.-<l o	, unless you request and receive an extension for good cause shown.   Iwill send them to the separation  authority.

5.	If you fail to consult counsel or submit statements in your own behalf, your failure will constitute a waiver of your right to do so.

6.	You were scheduled for a medical examination on 5 Jun 03.

7.	Any personal information you furnish in rebuttal is covered by the Privacy Act of 1974. A copy of AFI 36-3208 is available for your use in the 361 TRS student administration office.

8.	Execute the attached acknowledgment and return it to me immediately.

Commander

Attachments:  (listed on next page)

1.	AF Form 366, 19 May 03
2.	Response to Vacation of Suspended Punishment, 19 May 03
3.	LOR, 7 May 03
4.	Response to LOR, 12 May 03
5.	MF	21 Apr 03
6.	MFR	21 Apr 03
7.	MFR	18 Apr 03
8.	MFR	18 Apr 03
9.	MFR,.	May 03
10.	LOR, 2	an	3
11.  MFR......30 May 03
12.	AF Form 3070, 20 Feb 03
13.	Response to Article 15, 7 Feb 03 w/2 atch
14.	LOR, 5 Dec 02
15.	MFR.	. 30 May 03
16.	LOR,	2
17.	LOR, 13 Nov 02
18.	LOR, 20 Dec 02
19.	LOC, 18 Nov 01
20.	LOR, 25 Apr 01
21.	Response to LOR, 27 Apr 01
22.	LOR, 2 Apr 01
23.	Response to LOR, 2 Apr 01
24.	LOC, 23 Mar 01	,
25.	361 TRS/CCF Associate Memo, 13 Nov 01
26.	Airman's Receipt to Notification Memorandu .	.