\
AIR  -ORCE DISCH A RGE REV IEW HOARD HEARlNG RECORD
I AFSNiSSAN

	PERSONAL APPEARANCE
!"A!t t: or (".OUNSEL AND OK ORGA"'lfZ.ATJO;	
			
	x		

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADll!ITTS:Y'lll OR QKGANl1...ATlofli 0F c.oi;. ·s.E L--------"

x x x

ThS.:f.§
A92.31, A93.11, A!/4.53
' '

A67, tll

x

1	01<.Di:iR AP!'<)I NT!NO THE OOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW.OF [)JSCHAH<lE
3	LETTER OFKOTiFICATION

HEARING OATF.
02-10-04

,,,_..,....,. ,.,,.., - -cA.U:"r;ff1i\ti:l11s1- 	
FD2002-0166

4 .BIUH' OF PEl!SONNF.L FILE
CO!.'NSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
.t..DDI7IONAL EXHI3[TS S.l:B\41"1 T!o:l ) A"I' Tl1ffi OF PERSONAL  APPFARAN\.F.
TAPE iUiCOJH)l (". or 1rR;Oh.".i...I. APPERAlfCE HEA!.(!N'O
-rusv.r!!!w1t.t..,,;:ltlnllID.110
· ;::;::: % N\:1M!!· ,h Vifi1JJ:i:; :;:;,;.:::

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a 11crsonal ap11earance with/without counsel and the right to
submit an ap11Ucatfon to the AFBCMR.

,,o

SAFIMIBR
C STREET WEST, Sl,1TE 40
78150-4742

SECRETARY Of THE AIR f011CE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE J<EVlhW HOARD
133 COMMA.ND DR. EE WING, 320 fl J)()R

RANDOLPH AFB, TX

AFRQ FORM 0 2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

ANDREWS AF!l, MD W762-7illl2
Previous edition wilt be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONA LE	('ASI<: NtJM IH.I.(

FD2002·01Ct6	

GENERAL: The applicant appeal s for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was oflered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board 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 Doard finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any.

l ssues. Applicant was discharged for minor discipl inary infractions. He had at least one verbal counseling, three Records of Ind ividua.I Counseling, a Letter of Counseling, five Letters of Reprimand, an Unfavorable Information Fi l e, and had been placed on the Control Roster. His misconduct included two instances of failure to go, speeding on base, two instances ol' failure lo obey a lawfol order, dress and appearance violations, multiple instances of financial irresponsibi l ity, and two instances of lllegal parking. At the time of the discharge, member submitted a statement in his own behalf requesti ng retention. The Board noted that member was the same age as other airmen who adhere to the standards when his mi sconduct occuned, and he k new right from wrong. He was counseled repeatedl y and placed on the Control Roster in an effort to help him correct his deficiencies. He was mature and responsible for his actions, and therefore was held accountable for them. Although he was given numerous oppo1iunities to improve his behavior, he failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was withi n 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