AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVJCE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE JNITW,)	GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

YES

NO

x

!     SSgt

TYPE

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

X  RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS Al'lll OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNS£L

MEMBERS SITIING

x
x x x
x

AOl.39, A92.15, 92.19
A94.05

A67.90

APPUCATION FOR REVIEW OF DJSCJIARGE

HEARING DAU:
4 JUN 03

REMARKS

Case heard at Sc:ott AFB, Illinois.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to appear before the Board with or without counsel, and submitt an application to the AFBCMR.

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

AFHQ FORM 0..2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNClL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 31U> FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAl, RATIONALE	CASE  NUM.BER

FD1999-0088	

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

The applicant was offered a persona) appearance hearing before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS:   Upgrade of discharge to Honorable is denied.
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety or equity that would justify upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with a General Discharge for Misconduct - Pattern of Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline. Member received three Article ISs for operating a passenger car while drunk, missed flight movement through negligence, derelict by negligently failing to clear assigned dormitory  room  through billeting prior to port call date. The limited legal advice member claims is without merit. Applicant states his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation, and  other information contained in his records. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct off set any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. If he can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board. If he should choose to exercise this right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of  the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.  Based on the available records the Board found no impropriety or inequity.

The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change  his negative behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief