•	

m	--- - lSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RRCORn
.E INITIAL)

TYPE GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	RECORD REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON
x

x x x

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

x

ISSUES

A94.06

INDEX NUMBER

A67. 10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITIED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

28 Jul 2005	FD-2005-00005

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 78I50-4742

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00005	

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:  The Board grants the requested relief.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon  the  record  and  evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUE:  Applicant did not submit any issues.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go and for not wearing the required uniform to a mobility exercise.  He received a Vacation action under the UCMJ for driving while his license was suspended.  In addition, he received three Letters of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling for misconduct.  The Board did not condone the misconduct, although minor in nature, and the fact that the applicant was two months shy of completing his 4 year enlistment, and his good EPR' s, decided that an Honorable discharge would be more 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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge under the provisions of Title 10, USC  1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief