AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SRVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

-GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR OllGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

HON	GEN

l!OTHC
x x x x x

INDEX NUMBER
A67.90	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING DATE
5 NOV 02

CASE NUMBER
FD2002M0191

4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
APl'LICANT'SISSµE,AJllD THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE OISClJSSEO ON.THE Ani\ClmD AlR FORCE DJSCHARGEREVIEW BOAll.P ogC)TONAt:ll>\'ffONAt.E.

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781504742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AlR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 31\D FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM  02077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD02-0191	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) 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 is denied.

The board finds that the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge,  and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was able to identify none that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:  The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records indicated applicant received an Article 15 for being disorderly.  He also received four Letters of Reprimand and three letters of Counseling for financial irresponsibility (three times), sleeping on duty, failure to go, causing a domestic disturbance and damage to government property, and reporting for mobility processing without all of his required uniforms.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative/repetitive behavior.  The Board concluded the disciplinary infractions were 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 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