AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS ANll OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

x
x

ISSUES

A93.23 A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.IO

APPL!CATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
! ADDITIONAL  EXHIBITS  SlJRMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL   APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARlNG

HEARING  DATE	

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.

SA l'/MRBR
550 C STREET Wf'ST, SUITE 40

SECR;;rARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNF:L COUNCii, AIR FORCE DISCHARGE RF.Vll':W BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, l>E WING, JRD FLOOR

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIDNALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00546	

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:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and his incidents of misconduct were as a result of his anxiety and nervous condition.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, four Letters of Reprimand, and two Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  His misconduct included failure to complete a primary duty, failure to report for duty on time (3x), failure to complete tasking as directed by his supervisor, being drunk and disorderl y, failure to obey an order and recklessly damaging a light post.  The applicant contends he is being treated by mental health at the Veterans Administration.   The DRB opined that although the applicant has been seeing mental health, it did not impair his ability to know right from wrong or ability to choose the right.  The DRB opined that through these administrati ve 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 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 positi ve aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

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 of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due ro·- -'"

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