Iy l'i'.	_l

PERSONAL APPEA RANCE
iPNAAlM\ tOo'r ccomti<NNsiitLi;-A;i ND;oo;RftOORREGAONOILJA[Tj'1iQ()NN 	
YES	NO	(
x

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRf,SS AND OR ORGANIZATION Ot' COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING
x x x
x
x

llf-All!NG  DA TE

INDEX NIJMSER
A67.30

:::;;#8;' 'iiii1%'1'l.''(i l ·'f!fl>UBM!fl'. ff· J:lilil'll!MlWC'"g  )i\i.ii '.ltiD&:'
1	ORDER APPOINTING	BOARD
l   -APPLICATION f.'T)RREViEWOI' DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BR!F.F OF PJ::RSONNBL FILF.

25 .JUN 02	COUNSEL'S  RELEASE TO Ti IBBOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TTh.iE OF PERSON 4L A.PPE 4R "u'ICE

REMARKS
Case heard 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 submit  an application to the AFBCMR

1

SAF/M!BR
550 C STREET WLST. SlJiTF. 40
RANDOLPH AFl3. TX 781 50-4742

SF.CRF.TARY O F TllE AIR FORCE PERSON NEL COU NCIL
/\JR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR. EF. WING, 3m FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762·7002

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE	

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 to Honorable 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: The applicant states that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 13 years of service with no other adverse action. The records indicate the member was           convicted in a civilian court of law for arson. Having been convicted of a civil offense, a punitive discharge would be authorized for the same or a closely related offense under the Manual for Courts-Martial. The applicant was separated with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge. The DRB opined that the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant’s duty performance
The Board concluded the civilian conviction for arson was a significant departure from the conduct expected of all military members. The Board found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.

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	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