x

X* +

x

x

X* +

2

3

4

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE I:\'ITIAL)

MEMBERS SITTING

INDEX NUMBER
A70.00

-

RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESSA."10 OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

;;;; ,·;:·J-·'.:;;,-:,·,::":-:/;::(.J )iff{DJ_J.$Hs:l.!   BMff1:ilt llt:fW_JJQAl{ijf)t.fttli#U1;;;':;;;m.
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

HEARING DATE
26 SEP 02

CASE NUMBER
FD2001-0553

LETTER OF NOTIFICATI0 1' BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBJ\.1ITTED AT  T:E\1E OF PERSONAL   APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

RE!\·IARKS
Case beard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SIGNATURE OF RF.cgRDF.R	Slr.NA.TTJRF. OF ROA Rn  PRli'SIDFNT

CASE NUJ\.IBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIE\V BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE       FDO l -0553

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, to change the reason for the discharge, and to change his reenlistment code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Andrews AFB, MD on September 26, 2002.
The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5:  Applicant's contentions.
Exhibit 6 through 26:  Character Letters, Achievement awards and Certificates.

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

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge to Honorable is denied.  However, the Board grants an upgrade of discharge to General.  Change of Reason and Re Code is denied.

The applicant's issues are listed in the attached brief

ISSUE: The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too  harsh.  The records indicated the applicant was discharged with an Under Other Than Honorable Discharge in Lieu of a Court Martial for wrongfully and fraudulently obtaining telephone services on a government telephone line. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all  military members. While the DRB did not condone the applicant's misconduct, they did feel it would have been more equitable to give him a General discharge.

CONCLUSIONS:   The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requ irements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

However, in view of the foregoing findings the Board also concludes that the overall quality of the applicant's service is more accurately reflected by a General discharge. Therefore, the applicant's characterization for discharge should be changed to General.

Attachment: Exami ner's Brief