AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN	
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW	

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
MEMBER SITTING	-

I

I

I

li

j	!	l	I

X*+

I
A94.05

1	1	I
li	l
INDEX NU      ER

I
I
l
A67. 10

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

X*+

X*+ X*+

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING  DATE

01 Jun 2012

CASE NUMBER

FD-2010-00410

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

*Narrative reason and Authority
+Re Code

TO:

FROM:

I	,,	I	I
nm .,J ,     1.	1

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

I	I	I	I
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BO  Ru 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2010-00410	

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment 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 available service record.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:  The request for the upgrade of the discharge, to change the reason and authority for discharge, and to change the reenlistment code are denied.

ISSUE:   Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He does admit he made mistakes by letting curiosity and peer pressure persuade his actions.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article l 5s. His misconduct included underage drinking (2x).  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.

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.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief