AIR FOR rF nT"HARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
HTIAL)	'

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	RECORD REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATJON OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.IO

1	ORDER APPOlNTlNG THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

TAPE RECORDlNG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

26 Jul 2005

FD-2005-00066

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.

SAFIMRBR
SSO C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY OP THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCll.. AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, lRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 207fi2·7002

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

Previous edition will be used

CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE        FD-2005-00066

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 an Article 15 for failure to go, breaking a no contact order and dereliction in his duties. In addition, he received a Letter of Reprimand for showing up intoxicated for a mandatory appointment for alcohol awareness and was refused entry. Applicant states that his supervisor told him that he was an exceptional airman and everything would have been overlooked if it weren't for the Force Shaping Program. Then he states that he was being kicked out not because he was bad, but because they needed to meet a quota. This issue is without merit. The applicant was discharged due to the minor misconduct as discussed above. 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