AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME  OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AlC
X	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

DENY

X*+ X*+ X*+
X*+

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

X*+

3  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION	 	
4  BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
>--+-----------------·---·	-
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARJNG

HEARING DATIC	CASE N!JMDER

07 Jan 2010	FD-2008-00583

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 wil l be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

*Reason and Authority
+Reenlistment  Code

SAF/MR RR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78 I50.4742

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR  FORCE  PERSONN£L  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMANil IlR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 207<i:Zw ?'001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBF.R

FD-2008-00583	

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code.

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.

ISSUES:

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He further contends that he was not informed at the time of his discharge that he would be ineligible for reenlistment.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, four Letters of Reprimand, and two Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  His misconduct consisted of failure to refrain from smoking while in uniform, being disrespectful towards an NCO, failure to go (4x), failure to shave, and failure to keep dorm room in inspection order. 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 applicant 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 of 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 detenni nes the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief