am1.11•11 1111

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD.HEA.RING RECORD

rnnwurr

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

TYPE	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATJON OF COUNSEL

.YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

x x x x
x

A93.21

INDEX NUMBER

A67.IO

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
3	
HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER
23 Sep 2003	FD-2002-0163

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERAN CE

Case heard at Washington, D.G.

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

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL 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

FD-2002-0163	

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 available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

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 that would justify a change of discharge.

Issue 1. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions and for unsatisfactory performance. The records indicated the applicant received three Letters of Reprimand, three Records of Individual Counseling and an Unfavorable Information File for misconduct. He was also placed on the Control Roster. The misconduct included five instances of being late for duty, disobeying a lawful order, making a false statement, and failing to.pay a just debt. Additionally, member failed his End of Course Examination with a score of 48%, and before discharge was recommended, his supervisor worked closely with him reviewing test material, to no avail. Applicant contends he suffered from a sleep disorder which sometimes caused his tardiness. The records review disclosed no documents supporting this contention, nor did applicant submit any substantial documented evidence of such other than his personal assertions. In the absence of such evidence, the Board finds this issue without merit. The DRB opined that through the unit's administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior and improve his performance. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and therefore the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate. In summary, 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 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