AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (I.AST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

-GRADE	AFSN/SSAN	 	

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW
'	COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDJU:SS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES

MEMBERS SITTING

HON	GEN

VQTEOFTHE BOARD

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

EXHIBITS SUBlllllTED TO THE BOARD

A94.05

A70.00	l ORDER APPOJNTJNG THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
2	
HEARING DATE

CASE NUMBER

4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

21 FEB 03

FD2002-0367	COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL AJ'PERANCE HEARING
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S ECISJONALRATIONAL AAE DISCUSSED ONTilE AITAO!!':!> AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW. BOARD DECJSJONAL RATIONALE.

REMARKS
Case hea rd at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appea rance with/without counsel, and the right to subm it an application to the AFBCMR.

TO:

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

FROM:

DATE: 21FEB 03

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DJSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
I 535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 207627002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD02·0367	

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

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

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends that his discharge was too harsh because it was based on one isolated incident in 38 months of service and he did not have any other adverse actions. He also states that the charges were based on hearsay. Finally, the applicant states that he has been a respectable citizen since his discharge. The record indicates the applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge due to the fact that he asked for a discharge in lieu of a court martial. The applicant was charged with housebreaking, attempted larceny and dereliction of duty. The Board found no evidence of any inequity or impropriety on which to base a decision to upgrade the discharge. The characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct

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