AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAi .)	GRADF;	AFSN/SSAN

Al C
X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS  AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF THEBOf\P

!ION	GEN

UOTl lC

OTl lER

DENY

x

-----------+------+--·-·-·-·-----+-----+-----+	I
x x x
x

ISSUES

A92.21 A94.05 A93.21

INDEX NUMBER

A94.05

1 ORDER APl'OINTI NO Tl IE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSON NEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
>---+----------------------·--
ADDITIONA L EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 Jun 2010	FD-2009-00108

",

APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE llOAJU>'S PECISIONAL kAt'IONALll ARI! DISCUSSEl) ON THE ATl'ACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE Rl!VlllW llOAJU/ OllCISlONAt. RA'TIONAJ,l;.
.	,	,	"	:

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 wi l l   be made avai l able to the appl icant at the appl icant's req uest.

TO,	FROM,
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET W :. T, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

DATE:    6125/2010 .

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE l»;RSONNEt COUNCii. AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDRt:WS AFll, Mil 2076),7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-00108	

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.

attached brief contains avail able pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:   The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a  change of discharge. However, based upon the  record  and  evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Articles 15, an AMC Form 196 Commander's Report on Crew Member, and four Memorandums for Record for misconduct. Additionally, the applicant received a referral Enlisted Performance Report and had  references regarding misconduct  in his other reports. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The Board concluded that the characterization of the	received by the applicant was appropriate.

Issue      Applicant states that the discharge did not take into account the good	he did while in the
nor did it consider his diagnoses for insomnia which contributed to his misconduct.   The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports and other accomplishments.  They also reviewed his medical record.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance, and his diagnoses of insomnia which was accompanied by a co-occurring diagnosis of occupational problems.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

3. The DRB was pleased that the applicant is doing well. 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 within the discretion  of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

Inview of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable	for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief