AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

SSGT
X	RECORD  REVIEW
AllDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

x x x x

ISSUES

A94.05

lNIH'.X NllMBER

•	1 !ORDER APPOJ NTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER 01' N(HIFICATION
4 BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDI NG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARfNG

--1

llEARI"IG DATE

CASE NUMBER

Case heard i n 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 appl icant at the applicant's request.

TO:

SECRETARY  OF Hill AIR  FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE Rli:VIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR.;>: WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS Arn. MD lU762-7001

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

 	

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-Y2)

Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00353	

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 and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

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

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

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 two Letters of Reprimand and two Letters of Counseling for misconduct. His misconduct consisted of failing to provide appropriate and accurate infonnation inclusion in the daily report, failure to attend required dental appointment, displayed lack of professionalism, apprehended  by  civilian  authorities  and failed the Field Sobriety Test, his vehicle had an expired registration and he was carrying a concealed weapon, The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded that  the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The characterization of the discharge received by the appl icant was found to be appropriate.

CONCLUSION: 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 the discharge authority and 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief