MEMBER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX  NUMBER

A67.30

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 HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

29 Jul 2009

FD-2008-00109

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 request.

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

X

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00109	

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 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 contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received a discharge for misconduct.  No specific evidence of the misconduct or rationale was discovered during the record review.  Although the applicant did suggest that the commander, at the time, was acting with regard to race in an unfair manner; however, no specific support to that end was submitted by the applicant.  The DRB opined that through presumption of regularity that no impropriety or inequity occurred in this case based on the records and submissions.

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