A IR FORCE DISCHARGE R EVIEW BOARD HEA RING R ECORD

NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST Mrnou:I NITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAJ'.f

TYPE

P ERSON AL APPEA R A NC E	X    R ECOR D R EVIEW

COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORG ANIZATIO!'l O F COUNSEL
YF.S	NO
x

M EM BE R S SITTING

HON	GliN

VOT!i OnHE BOARO

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x

·--------·-----·-·-···-·-·---+----+-- ---+--·--f----·--·t-x----·--·--·

EXlllTllTS SllfiMITTED TOTl l E BOARD
ORDER APPOfNTING TllE BOARD
2	APPLICATf6:-.J FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

HEARING DATE

CASE NUMBER

3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

18 JUN 02

FD2002-0004		COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMJTTf'D AT TIME m PERSONAL AVl'EARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSOl\1\L APPf'RANCE llEAR I NCl -··--
APPLIC AKf'S ISSUE JIJJDTHE BOARD'S DE•  IONAL RATl()l\AL AREi fsc'i)s	rn-::r-rr:;;.c111m AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE
REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Boa rd, the right to a personal  appearance w i th/withou t counsel, and the right to submit an application  to the AFBCMR.

----------
DATE 18 ,JUN 02

SAFIMTBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPI I AFB. TX 78150-4742

SECR ETARY OF TllE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISC!IARGE REVI EW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WI NG, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFR, MD 20762-7002

Af HQ FOR M	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used.

I

FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE
I

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

CASE NUMBER

applicant was offered a personal appearancebefore the Discharge Review	(DRB) but declined to this right.

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is denied.

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

The applicant's issue is listed in the attached brief.

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and also contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when young. The information provided by the applicant and contained in his records was carefully reviewed by the	The records indicated the applicant received two Article    a Letter of Counseling and a Letter of Admonishment for misconduct. The misconduct included failing to obey a lawful order, dereliction of duty and failure to go to appointed place of duty.   The	opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.   The	recognized the applicant was 20 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. The Board concluded the misconduct outweighed the otherwise satisfactory performance of this member. 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	administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings the board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief