-

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF'SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X  RECORD REVIEW

YES	NO
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANl7ATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEi,

MEMBERS SITTING

L	1

llON	GEN

X+

VOTEOFTHE  BOARD

lJOTllC

OTHER

DENY

X* X* X*

X*

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

EXIDlllTS SUBMITTED TO THE JIOARD

A92.36, A92.21, A67.0l

A67.90	J	ORDER APPOINTJNG THE BOARD
2	APPLJCATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
2	
HEARING DATE
03-03-25

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0363

4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITlONAL EXHIBITS SUBMlTfED AT  TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
.;   ,?'(;!'IT' ISSUE AND THE BOARJYS DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED J\JRR?- EJ>ISCl ARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONA L.RATIONALE.
· .:.'.	>· ...".J;::,. YJ·.·>
REMARKS

+Change Reason and Authority to Secretarial Authority.

*Change Reason and Authority to Minor Disciplinary Infractions.

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

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

= = --

l--

_SJGNAUJJlU>J'JlQ.ilWJ'JU;SJQElfS_ _ _ _ _ ----

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -,
''

-l	-v-

c- - -- - - - - - -------- --- -- --- ---=------------------------	oAn, W,2$

SAF/MIBR		SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL	
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANOOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742		AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 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 NUMBER

FD2002-0363	

GENERAL: The applicant  appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, and to change the reason and authority for his discharge to "early separation.".

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board  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 is denied. Reason and authority for discharge are changed to more accurately reflect the basis for member's discharge.

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 misconduct, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. He had three Letters of Reprimand, a Letter of Admonishment, and at least one verbal counseling. There was also a Memo for Record documenting misconduct. This misconduct included writing 29 bad checks totaling more than $1,000.00, failing to complete task certification training, failing to have the required shots for mobility on two separate occasions, failing to have the correct uniforms for mobility once, failing to maintain his base housing yard, and living in base housing for 8 months after his family had departed. Additionally, the record review revealed that member was on the Weight Management Program. The Board noted that when his misconduct occurred, member was the same age as other airmen who had adhered to the standards and he knew right from wrong, so he was held accountable for his actions. The Board surmised that although member's misconduct was a departure from the stand ards expected of airmen, it didn 't rise to the level of serious misconduct that would warrant the reason and authority for his discharge to be "conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline." Therefore, the Board determined the basis for member's discharge would be better portrayed as "minor disciplinary infractions." Except for changing the reason  for discharge in this way, the Board could find no wrongful action by the Air Force, nor an inequity or impropriety on which to base an upgrade.

The applicant submitted some documents regarding his post service conduct cons1stmg of a college transcript, employee performance evaluations and training certificates, and a certificate of appreciation. While the Board commends member on his post-service conduct and notes it may be an improvement from that while he served in the military, it does not pertain to the period of service under review and does not offer a basis on which to warrant an upgrade.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was essentially 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 characterization  of discharge should not be changed.  However, the board further concludes that the reason and authority for discharge is more  accurately  described  as minor disciplinary infractions, thus the applicant's reason and authority for discharge shouJd be changed to minor disciplinary infractions under Title 10, USC1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief