AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD H EARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

YES	No
x

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

ILT
X	RECORD REVIEW
AIJIJR;ss ANU OK OKGANIZA TION OF COUNSEL

HON	GEN	UOTHC
x x

OTHER

DENY

"TSSm:s

A94.11 A94.55

Tl'mEX N(JlhlJLlt

x

x
-----··---·-+---
x

A49.00
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
2	
----	-- ·-.,· ·------------------
4	BRIEF Of PERSON NEL Fi i Jc
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO Tl IE HOAIW
ADDJTIONAL EXHIRITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE R ECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING IJATIO	CASIO NUMBER

27 Aug 2009	FD-2008-00364

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

J\dvise appl icant 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 wil l  be made avai la bl e to the appl icant at the appl icant's request.

'[(),

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

FROMo

SF.CRnARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCIO IJISCHARGt; KEY":w HOAl<D
1535 COMMAND  DR, EE WING, 3RD  FLOOR
ANDREWS AFD, MD 20762-7001

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

Previous

Al R FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NlJMBER

FD-2008-00364	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was  offered  a personal  appearance  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRD)  but  decl ined and requests that the review be completed based  on the available service record.  The attached  brief  contains avai l.abl.e pcrti ncnt data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  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.

Evidence in the record indicates the applicant received:
L   Two (2)	of Reprimand for derelict in performance  of duties (failed to follow an order/false official statement) and failure to complete I ntroductory Flight Training due to factors within  his control.
2.	One (1)	of Counseling for failure to attend a meeting with his commander
3.	One (1)	Form 126a for allowing several awards to go undelivered to recipients
4.	One (1) statement from the MSS/CC concerning late report for a flight
5.	Five (5) Memoranda for Record for failure to call in sortie counts, failure to  complete  assigned duties, oversleeping and reporting late for duty, inabi lity to meet suspenses and failure to track inventory of chemical defense equipment and failure to report for duty

ISSUES: The applicant contends his was inequitable based on 1) i nstances that were either not  within his control or i nfluence 2) hi s commander showed unprofessionalism throughout  the  discharge  process  and attacked the applicant's  personality  in an unfair vvay

The Board opined that the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior. Given the record in hand, the Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career.  The Board determined the discharge was appropriate.

However, the Board highly recommends, that if the applicant can  provide  additional  documented information to substantiate his issues, he should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board. If he should choose to exercise his right, the applicant shoul d be prepared to provide the Board with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as wel l as any contributions lo the community.

CONCLUSIONS: At this  time,  the  Discharge  Review Board  concludes  that  the  discharge  was  consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation  and was withi n the discretion of the d ischarge authority  and that the applicant  was provided  full administrative "due process.

J n 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      changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief