AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER  (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

CAPT
ITYE.GN   '	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X	RECORD  REVIEW

1     ····.·	Jl \.;;; NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES		No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.50

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

CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00440

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.

SIGNATURE	COROF.R

ISIGNA'J]lliL!)F BOARD  PREsJmi'.N?

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

r-	--	----	--	--CASE_N_U_M_BE-R	----

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2004-00440

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  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: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received a General Discharge for intentional  or discreditable mismanagement of personal affairs arid recurring misconduct punishable by Military or civil authority. Over a period of seven years, applicant was accused of and/or incarcerated for domestic disputes, aggravated assaults, (once with a firearm), disorderly conduct, battery, and violating a no-contact order. Most of the applicant's issues center around his Board of Inquiry and the accusation that his wife made false allegations. Applicant also states that the JAG acted improperly during the investigation. The facts of the case are as follows: A Board Of Inquiry heard evidence from  a civilian police officer, applicant's  estranged spouse, his son, members of the applicant's squadron, and the applicant. The estranged spouse and child testified to numerous instances of violence or threatened violence by applicant, associated with his  excessive use of alcohol. Applicant's spouse  also provided evidence regarding violation of a no.contact order, issued by civilian and military authorities. The case file was found to be legally sufficient. 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.

Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

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