AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITJAL)

GRADE

AMN
X	RECORD  REVIEW

AFSN/SSAN

YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.IO

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

A92. 15
A92.03

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER Of NOTif!CATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llMIUNG  DATE	CASE NllMIU:i<

27 May 2010	FD-2009-00046

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

···• :'' ""

VU!W

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCrvJR.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

 	

TOo

SAP/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH APB, TX 78150-4742

FROM,

SF:CRJi:T,\RY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIF:W BOARD
I535 COMMAND  DR, EE WING, 3Rll fLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762·700I

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-00046	

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. FINDINGS:  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. Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He admits that his lack of maturity and experience were factors in him not being successful in the Air Force.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Vacation, two Letters of Reprimand,
and a Record of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  His misconduct included holding an alcoholic beverage while underage, failure to report for duty, failure to complete CDC's, leaving work and not returning, rude behavior, negative attitude, being late for duty, making a false statement (2x), and failing to update personnel records.  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.

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 accomplislunents.  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.

CONCLUSIONS:  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 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.

Attaclunent: Examiner's Brief