AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD BEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AlC
X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZAl'ION OF COUNSEL

MEMBF.R 'i;JT'T'U•l"'

X*+

X*+ X*+

ISSUES

A92.2l A92.01 A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMnTED AT TIME or
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATR	CASE NUMBER

29 Jan 2010	FD 2008-00601

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 appl icant's request.

*Reason and Authority
+Reenlistment  Code

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFH, 'f X 78150-4742

SECRETARY 0''fHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISC.1iARGE REVIEW BOAR!!
1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING. 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762- 7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00601	

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.

ISSUE:

Issue 1 . Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He further contends his Non-Judicial Punislunents were handled inappropriately.  He has expressed a desire to have his discharge upgraded so that he may be eligible to reenlist in the armed forces.  The records indicated the applicant received three Article 1	and a Letter of Counseling for misconduct.  His misconduct consisted of failure to report for two scheduled dental appointments, wrongfully appropriate a truck and automobile, making false official statements, and committing sodomy.  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 of recommendation and other accomplishments.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job.  However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

CONCLUSION: 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 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 detennines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief