----

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE		AFSN/SSAN 	
Al C	· 11 111	II
TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
·-- ·-_cous	NAME OF COU NSEL A ND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS A ND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x

.  .·

V_-  .<.)_.T, _ E,._OF THE BOARD     ..

.
·.·..   .

-

MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x
x x
i
x
x

··-	--- -··   ..
ISSUES	A93.0l	INDEX NUMBER	A67.50

-- .-

---_.= --- :_    EXi:IIBJTS-SUBMITIEO -TO_-TH)t_B,OARI>:

. :--=: _- - -

A94.05	l	ORDER APPOINTING TH E BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR  REV[E\V  OF rnSCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTJ FlCATlON
4	BRJEF OF PERSONNEL F[LE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADD!TlONAL EXHllllTS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE: NUMBER

OJ Mar 2005	FD-2004-00423
APPLl.CA--N- -T: S-,tS-SUE"AND-THE=BCiA.RD-- ;S'DECISIO- N- AL RATIO- -N- A-L A- RE DISCUS- SEri ON'THE'ATT-AC- H-E-biA-i!-lFO- RCE DISCHARGE REVll--W B-O---ARD 'D-·E' -CISIONAL RAT-,IO,_NALE

- '	-"

'     -        '   - -	-   '  ,.

·:--  - '  --

-,  - --

-         --

-  -	-,     ,- -	-

"	-	-      -	'	-

 	•••• 	
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 req uest

/'

'  ;- ' .. - <:\<,_,·,

..	'   ·..    <: •	',    .   Il'!DORSEl\fENT	DATE:     31112005

TO:	FROM:

SAFIMRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE  P.ERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET \VEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND OR,. EE WING, JRD  FLOOR
RAN DOLPH AFB. TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS  AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous  edition·wiffbe used

AIR FORCE  DISCHARGE  REVIE'V BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00423	

GENERAL:	The applicant appeals for upgrade  of discharge to honorable  and 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 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  and  change  of  reason  and  authority  for  discharge,  and  change  of reenlistment code is 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 I. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received four Letters of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling for misconduct.  The misconduct included insubordinate conduct towards a noncommissioned  officer, lying, willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer, late for work, speeding, disorderly conduct, and using indecent language.  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.

Issue 2. Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when young. The DRB recognized the applican t was 20 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was older  than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.
The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

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