AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOAR D HEARING RECORD
\--- -- .---,- - ----, - -----cc= -------r......,...,--::-=-·· T··· ····	--------------\
I   NAME OF SERVICE  MEMBER  (LAST, 1 1RST MIDDLE INITIAl.)	GRADE	i\FSN/SSAN

AM N	?  f! ? PF

PERSONAL APPEARANCF.	X   RECOR D REVIEW

YES	NO
x

NAME OF COUNSt:L AND OR ORGANIZI\ TION

l\J>llRESS AND OR ORGl\NIZATION OF COl•NSF.I,

VOTE OF THE DOAJro

MEMBERS  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	QTllF.R	DENY

j	x

r1	.
'
:
''	x
'
'	x

x

''

'

'
'I
<	'
--- -·:	x
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBt:R	ornmrrs SUDMIJTED TO THI: BOARD	 	
A92.21, A.93.0l, A93.07,	A67.IO	l	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
A94.05,  A94.ll	2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER	4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FJLE
15 MAY  03	FD00-00263	COUNSEL'S REI.EASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHllllTS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PF,RSONAL APPEARANCE

r--+l'Al'E RECORDING OF PERSONAL Al'PERANCE HEARING
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND IHf. 80ARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON lHE ATTACHED AlR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATlONAUl.

ff.EMARkS

Case heard at And rews AFB, MD

-	11	.....	
;..;.1i;l'(	Pl'JW'.::Ql!.ot::B_ -  ------- --l-l_ _ _ _ .;..L.J._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ lJ YYJU:_Qt .llP.l\JU!.titStP..f N-1'.._	-----------
'.. ''
------------·ft·----- -------------- ------ ---------------------------- ·---------- -- · -·-----------	
INDORSEMl:NT	I	DATE: 29 MAY 03	
TO:
I	SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742
I	FROJ\I:
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3R1> FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
. .	

Advise applicant of the decision of the Boa rd and his right to appeal to the Board for Correction of Military Records.

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)	Previous ed1t1on will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable

The appl icant's case was considered by the Discharge Review Board (ORB), at Andrews AFB MD, on May
15, 2003. The applicant did not appear.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS:  The DRB denies the requested relief.
The ORB finds that the evidence of record and that provided by the applicant does not substantiate an
inequity or an impropriety that would justify an upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUES:  The applicant was discharged with General service characterization  from the Air Force for minor disciplinary infractions.   He has two letters of repri mand  for unauthorized  absence and for failure to obey
orders. He has nine records of individual counsel ing: four for failing to maintain safety standards, two for failure to go, two for unsatisfactory duty performance, and one for unsatisfactory personal appearance. Finally, the applicant has one Article 15 for leaving his place of duty without authorization. He raises three issues in his application. He indicates first that personal problems (marital trouble) and youth contributed to his misconduct. Second, that his punishments and disciplinary actions were exaggerated by a commander and superintendent who wanted to make an example of him. Finally, he argues that his post­ service accomplishments paint a better picture of the ability, dedication, and patriotism that really defines him as a person-today and when he was in the Air Force.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board (DRB) concluded that none of the issues have merit It may be that his personal problems and immaturity contributed to his misconduct, but the record indicates he was given an extraordinary number of chances to overcome those problems. Moreover, thousands of young airmen have similar difficulties and never engage in even a fraction of the applicant's misbehavior. The num ber of opportunities the applicant was given to comply with standards also cuts against the argument he was made an example of. According to the record, the command took repeated disciplinary action against him only because he repeatedly engaged in misconduct. Based on the descriptions of the various instances of misconduct in the record, the disciplinary action taken was appropriate and in some cases, forgiving. As for his post-service conduct, his accomplishments are laudable and his effort to make a life for himself and family despite his discharge is commendable. However, this by itself is not enough to undo the earlier action. Upgrading the discharge characterization based on nothing more than post-service conduct would be viewed as clemency or a pardon, authority the DRB is not permitted to exercise. In short, without an inequity or impropriety, the DRB cannot upgrade the characterization.

Having found no inequity or impropriety, the ORB declines to upgrade the discharge or change any other
aspect of the applicant's record.  The requested relief is denied.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief