.••

AIR FORCE DlSCHARGEREVJE\V BOARD HEARING RECORD
JH 11•1111111•11111 111111,	AlC	. ,
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDl"E INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
totiNS£L   .    .-

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADmu:ss  AND  OR ORGANIZATION   OF COUNSEL

• < ..'\

I/,>	V9TE OF THE BOARD ':z;i ·: \):c, , .- .:
,	..---··	'·'  ;<>;<;:  <,	•

MEMBER SITTING

.. -... _.,._

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

TJ--·--'•••• - -•• _  ,..,...-·-· ..	_ ,..,._
lSSllES	A94.53	JNDEX NUMB£R	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBJ\1ITTED TO THE BOA.RD
I	ORDER APPOINTING TI-IE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW  OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TI-IE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

18 May 2005	FD-2005-00009
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND TH& BO/\RIJ'.S DECISIONAL Rf\ noNAL_ARE DISCUSSJW ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DlSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONfU. ll.AHONALE -

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board 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.

-····-"·--·····" ·-·""·---------------	,

---

---	-

,..,-"'INDORSEMENT	DATE: 5123/2005
e'"w      •	•	•	-··-

To,	!'ROM;
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR fORO;DJSCllARG£ REVU:W llOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFll, MD 20762-7002

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

CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

FD-2005-00009

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

The applicant was scheduled to appear and testify before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), via Video­ Teleconference between St Augustine, FL, and Andrews AFB on 18 May 2005, but failed to appear or notify the DRB.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are 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 states he was given an involuntary discharge under honorable conditions and rightly so, for he did not understand fully the responsibilities asked of him to be performed on a day to day basis for the AF as an A 1C. He is now asking on behalf of his family, that his discharge RE code be changed to allow him to re­ enlist in the military to again be able to provide for his wife and young son. He states he left the AF as a hot­ headed young man and hopes to be allowed to re-enter the military as an intelligent, responsible man with a sense of duty for a nation and pride for family. The records indicated that the applicant received one Article 15 for unlawfully striking another airman, one LOR for leaving his place of duty without authority, one LOC for disrespect to an NCO, and another LOR for failing to report to his place of duty. 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 farther 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