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

TYPE GEN

I	PERSONAL  AYYEAKAr'ICE

AB
x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

YES	I	No
I x

' NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

VOTE ()F TllE l{()A:tID

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x
x

ISSUES

A93.09

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

x x x

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFJCA TION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'.2 RELEASE TO THE BOARD
3	
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

29 Dec 2005

FD-2005-00282

.

P!-ICANJ''S -\Jill!JH' EBoJ®?t l?eS ION!\ljR.A'l'tgJiAL•llRE.OISC-USSEjf p THE·ATTASti·Al1t.FprtCi'tll$PfA!tGE.RJ!VI!lW j-!Qi\lU)DEC! SJONALRi;lpl'{ALE
Case heard at Wash ington, 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:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 781 50-4742

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-2005-00282	

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 does not contest his discharge. He merely states that he would like an upgrade for his future reputation on resumes. The records indicated the applicant received two Article l 5s and a Letter of Reprimand for consuming alcohol underage, driving under the influence of alcohol, and willfully failed to refrain from frequenting a local hotel. 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