AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVlCE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST Mll>DLE INITlAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDl<ESS ANll OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

x x
x
x
---·-···- '"''"·------+-------j----··-+-----+----· +	i

A94.05	A67.10

I 2    Al'PLICAf!ON  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRll::F OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT	OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
ITAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARl G  DATE	

05 Aug 2010	FD-2009-00142

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, t he right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

Names and votes will be made avai l able to the applicant at the applicant's request.

SECRETARY Ot' Ttt!C AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COllNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COM·IAND DR, EE WING, 3Rll  FLOOR ANf)REWS A.Fil, Mil 20762-7001

AFHQ  FORM  0-2077, JAN  00	(Ef -V 2)	Previous

AIR FORCE UISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-00142	

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 avai l able 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.

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:

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He admits that he was young and made mistakes.  He desires to have his discharge upgrad ed for "gainful" employment.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 1 5, flmr Letters or Reprimand , and two Letters of Counseling for misconduct.  His misconduct included failure to keep su11icient funds in his account (3x), viol ation of curfew policy, sleeping on duty, disobeying a lawful order, and failure to maintain minimum weight standards.The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change xxhis negative behavior.  The Board concluded that the negative aspects or 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 req uirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoi ng findi ngs, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief