AIR FORCE DISCHA RGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME QI« SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDL1' INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X*!

X*+

ORDER APPOINTING Tl le BOARD
2  APPLICATION WR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
•	3 LETTER OF NOTfflCA TION
4  f!RIEF OF PE1{$0NNEL
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING or PERSONAL APPl'.ARANCE HEARING

HEARING IJATE

CASE NUMlff.!!

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Roard, 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 avail able to the applicant at the appl icant's req uest.

*Reason and Authority
+Reenlistment Code

INDOSEIHENT

TO;

SAF/MR f:lR
550 C STREET WEST. SUIT!' 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PR!!SONNEL COUNCIL
.-\IK fORCE DISCHARGt'. l<t:VlliW  BOARD 1535 COMMAND Ul!,  '.E WING, JRD F'LOO!! ANDREWS AFll, Mil 20762-1001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

	

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  fi.J r  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority  for the discharge, and to change the reenl istment 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 availabl e service record.

The attached brief contai ns available pertinent data on the appl icant and the factors leading to the discharge.

1r1NDING:  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, appl icant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and that he has served his time for his mistakes.  He further expressed that he desired to have his discharge upgraded so that he may be eligible to reenlist into the armed forces.   The records indicated the applicant received a General Comt Mmtial for assaulting a female hy striking and grabbing her with his hands and physically controlli ng a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.  He was disciplined with a reduction in grade to Airman Basic, confinement for 180 days, forfeiture of pay, and 30 days of extra duty. 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 regul ation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the appl icant was provided foll 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