AIR FORCE DISCH ARG E REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAM E OF SERVICE l\H:MBF.R (LAST, FIRST M IDDLE 1:-;1TJAL)	GRADE	AFS:-.1/SSAN

x
AlllH<f'.SS AND OR

x

---·--· ·-·------+------+---··----'---- ·---+-----+-···----'.

X*+

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

APJ>LICAT!ON FOR REVIEW OF DISC! IARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTff lCATION
4 BRIEF OF	FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOAR D
ADDITIONAi.  EXHIBITS	A'l TfME OF Pl-'RSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPF R ECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEA RANCE HEARING

llEARl"G  DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 Jun 2010

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.

*Reason and Authority
+Reen l istment Code

 	

SA F/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUlTE 40 RANDOi.i'll A FH, TX ?R \ 50-4742

FROM:

SEC.RETA RY OF THE Allt FORCE PERSONNEi. COUNCIL AIR FORCJ; lllSCUARGE REVIEW !IOARD
1535 COM:>IAND llR, F'.F: WING, JRD H.OOR ANDREWS AFB, MD zo71,z.7001

AFHQ FORM  0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-Y2)

Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVI E\V BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-00042	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority f()r the discharge, and to change the rccn 1 istmcnt code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Di scharge Revi ew 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, 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

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He has expressed a desire to have  his discharge upgraded so that he may be eligible to serve his country again in the United States Air Force Reserve.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two	of Reprimand, and three Memorandums for Record for misconduct.  His misconduct consisted of failure to report, room inspection failures (3x}, provid ing a false statement and flushing a cigarette down the toilet in his dorm room.  The DR13 opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had anlple 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 U1e 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	no legal or equitabl e basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attaclunent: Examiner's Brief