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

'	'	SSGT	'	'

r·------------------------	----------------

--------------J

-------------------------	'	'
TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x

-

r>

1--o

1--o

VOllH)F THE ]JOARO
MEMBER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
---------------------------------	X*

X*
.
X* X*
----------------------------------	X*

ISSUES	A92.0l	INDEX NUMBER	A67.90	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARO
A94.05	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 HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

20 Mar 2007	FD-2005-00474
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE AliACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW !lOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard in 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 req uest.

* Reason and Authority

c::../ ";	-	-	•
•SJvtsin11P.: orus;p _ ...-::7-.1••:d ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2':._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ [sJ1rtsIl!6t; Pf B_Rp_i:_R_F;MJO;.f'!.l. _ ;{_ _ _ ..._ _ .... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
'' ''' '
INDORSEMENT	0	DATE: j ii1iim11
TO,	FROM'

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 781 50-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-004 74

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

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

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 and change of reason and authority for discharge are 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:

Issue 1. Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s, a Vacation, a Letter of Reprimand and a civilian conviction for misconduct.  The applicant received his first Article 15 for assaulting his wife by pushing down on her head with his forearm, assaulting his wife by grabbing her hair, holding her head down and punching the back of her head with a closed fist, and violation of a no-contact order.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Technical Sergeant and forfeiture of pay for two months.  His second Article 15 was for unlawfully head-butting and pushing his wife.  He received a suspended reduction in grade to Staff Sergeant, restriction to base for 60 days and a reprimand.  His demotion was later vacated due to disorderly conduct.  The record also indicated the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for failure to obey a lawful order and that he had a civilian conviction for domestic violence.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the applicant's 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.

Issue 2.  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 ofrecommendation  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