AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBF,H. (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AI<'SN/SSAN

AMN
X	RECORD REVI EW

n: s	No
x

MF.MRFU <;:ITTll\Jr'

ADDRESS  AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF THE BOAR[!

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x x

ISSU>:S

A94.05 A94.55

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR R EVIEW OF DISCHARGE
t---+-	-	-	-	1
3	LETTER OF NOTI FICATION
4	HRIEF OF PERSONN EL FILE
COlJ NSEL'S R ELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONA L f:XH IBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of PERSONAL  APPEARANCF
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE fl lARI NG

HEARING DATE	CASt: NUMBER

11 Dec 2009	FD-2008-00594
APPUCANT'$ i$SUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL M'UONAL!l AllJi OISCUSSEO ON THE ATTACHED AIR fORCE DlSCHAROE Rl!VIBW BOAl!O DECISJONAL RATIONALE.

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise appl icant 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 wi ll be made available to the applicant at the applicant's req uest.

m< rn: 12/l!'i/2009

TU,

SAF/M RBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFH, TX 781 50-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCF: lllSCllARGF: REVIF:W BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, F:E WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASR NUMBER

FD-2008-00594	

GENERAL:   The applicant appeals for upgrade  of discharge to honorable  and to change the reenlistment (RE) code.

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance befbre 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.

FINDINGS:  The Board denies the upgrade of the 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.

ISSUE:   The applicant contends discharge was ineq uitable because he was not given a chance to show his
full potential .

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article  l 5s, two Letters of Reprimand, and three Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  His miscond uct included communicati ng a t hreat to injure an NCO, disrespect toward a
superior NCO, failure to complete CDCs within the required 30-days, failure to remain awake while on duty, failure to follow safety guidelines, disregarding a direct order, failure to go at the time prescri bed, missing a mandatory formation, and failure to use Technical Order 35F3-20-l.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the appl icant had ample opportunities to change his	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 and the RE code assigned were found to be appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requi rements 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 should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief