AI R FORCE DISCH A RG E R l<:v rnw BOA RD HEA RING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEM BER (LAST, FIRST M IDDLE I N ITIAL)

PE RSON AL APPEARANCE

GRADE

AMN
x

RECORD R EVIEW

AFSN/SSA N

YES	No
x

·---------- --···T---- ---------j
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANllAflON OF COlJNSEL

HON	GFN	UOTHC
--·- •·•·w - -- -·---j-------;--

OTHER

DFN Y
x

 		"t- ------;-- ----;-- ------i---···-----· - _,_ J·	·---
x x x
x

---·--  -·· ---+----- -----'-, --_L_ 	_J

_,_	_

ISS\IF:S

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

E.X,..l'tmrts SUBMJrnm TO n·m--- BOA1lD'----'"''-'----

'  . '	.

ORDER Al'POINTING THE BOARD
2   Al'l'LICATION FOR R EVI EW OF 01sc,_H_A_R_G_1E	I
3  LETTER OF NOT!FICA TION
4  HRIFF OF PERSONNEL FILE
·---------------- 1
COUNSEL'S RFLFASE TO THE BOARD
·-------- J•-• w	1
ADDITIONAL EXI llHITS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE f l b:A Rf NG

HEARING UAH;	

24 Jun 2010	FD-2008-00436
' APl'LltT'$ l$SOE AND nm BOAR!YS ).$JS,lpNAL ltATIONAW ARE DISCUSSED ON Tl m ATTACHED AIR fORCE HISCfpt REV.mW ll.\'!A;Rn DECISlONAl AATION.E.

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 appl ication to the AFBCMR.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the appl icant's request.

lSM/MRHR

OFTllE AIR FORCE PERSONNF.L COUNCIL

IJ"lj.LJ\..Jl.'\. .l:!ll.l!.<1'1T

550 C STREET WFST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB.. TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY
All< FOHC>: DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ISJS COMMANll Ill<, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANllR WS AFB, Mil 2076P<KJI

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

Previous

AIR FORCE DISCH ARG E REVIEW BOAR D DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00404	

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 lead ing to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  The Board denies U1e upgrade of the discharge.

The Board  finds that  neither  the  evidence  of record  nor that provided  by the appl icant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUES:

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He contends he did have some problems adapting to the mi litary lifestyle hut yet he was told he was a good airman.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Vacation, and nine Letters of Reprimand for misconduct.  His misconduct included engaging in a water fight and a verbal altercation with another airman, removing M9 pistol from its holster to pose for a picture in full public view, failing to stay awake on post (3x), making a false official statement, theil of hand gun, failure to go (4x), and involvement in a verbal altercation and communication a threat.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the appl icant 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 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 the applicant 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 shoul d remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief