AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
- -- -- - --- -- ""' ......... ,...,.............. ...-.nn" 1" "''HTIAL)

TYPE GEN	PJ;;IDSUNAL Al'l'J;;AKANCE

A
x	RECORD REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANlZATIO:S OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.53 AOl.00 A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNtL FILE COUNSEL"S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

11 Feb 2005	FD-2004-00382

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, SlITTE 40 RANDOLl'H AFB, TX 78150-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL  COUNCU. AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVJE'W BOARD
1535 COMJ\-lAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD ?0762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous editiorrwiltbe-used--

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00382	

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

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.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends although his discharge was general, his time in the Air Force was honorable. The records indicated the applicant received a general discharge for a pattern of misconduct. His misconduct included an Article 15, two vacation actions, one Letter of Reprimand, and three Records of Individual Counseling. 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