AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR OHGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGA!"llZATJON OF COUNSEL

x x x x
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER
A94.53, A92.37, A67.0l	A67. 10	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	IErf ER OF NOTIFICATJON

HEARING DATE
02-08-13

CAS'. NUMBER
FD2002-0121

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONA!. APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

REMAR
Case beard at Washington, D.C.

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

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WE   , SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
J.535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ  FORM  0-2077, JAN  00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NlJMBE:R

FD2002-0121	

GENERAL:   The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the  Discharge Review Board but declined  to exercise this right.

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

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. He had three verbal counselings, three Records of Individual  Counseling, an Article 15, and vacation of suspended punishment. His misconduct included smoking in the dormitory in violation of base regulations, failure to retu rn to class after lunch on multiple occasions, failure to bring his homework to class as directed on several occasions, dress and appearance violations, failure to have his military identification card and technical trai ning "phase" card in his possession as required, failure to have his technical order materials avai lable in order to perform his assigned duties, wrongfully entering the base lodging facilities, wrongfully appropriating the  use  of  a lodging room for several days without proper payment, and drinking on base whi le under the  legally allowed age. Member was also washed back in technical training due to a block test fai lure, and had no Enlisted Performance Reports during his period of service.  At the time of the discharge, member submitted a statement on his own behalf,  admitting his mistakes, and requesting to be retained. Applicant  now also concedes he was "given proper pu nishment" and has learned from his actions. At the time of the discharge, applicant did not attempt to establish his innocence, and he brings no issues to the Board now. The Board noted member was responsible for his actions of  misconduct, counseled and given the  opportunity  to improve his behavior but failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

CONCLUSIONS: 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 that 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, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief