AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SimVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

AlC
X	RECORD   REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

APPLICATION   FOR REVIE.V:..1.:..:.:.F.:....:..:...::..:._...:..:...:..:..::.:=--- ·
: LETTER Of NOTIFICATION
, 4 BRIEF Of PERSONNEL
, COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TJME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE I !RARING

HEARlNG  DATE	CASE Nl!MHER

26 Aug 2010

FD-2009-00172

Case heard in Washi ngton, D.C.

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

Names and votes will be made availabl e to the appl icant at the applicant's req uest.

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPI I AF!3, TX 78150-4742

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, .JAN 00

SE:CRETARV Ot THE AIR FORCE f'ERSON!'WL COl: Cll.
AIIH'ORCE O!SCllAl<GE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMANll DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANllR:ws AFB, MD 2Q762-700J

(EF- V2)	Previous

AIR FOHCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-001 72	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorabl e.

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 perti nent 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. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand and a Letter of Counsel ing for misconduct. His misconduct included being disorderly, urinating and exposing himself in a pu blic place, operati ng a defective vehicle, cheating during PT run, and allowing a female in his dormitory room. 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.

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 fmther concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief