_J

AIR FORCE DISCH ARGE REVIllW  BOARD HEARING  Rl.:CORD

N.\M:OF SKRViC:E ME:'.'IBER (LAST, ·1RST  l DDLE INITL'\ L)	AJ?SN/SSAN

- - -r

Tl'E

x'"

X    RECORD ll.RVll!:W
AVVRl:};S AND OR ORG/Ll'lll:l.A flON OF c0L:"ISJ::L

·····

MEMBERS SITTI NG

"

 	j	I	...

-
! X	:

3	[.E'ITl<R OF >IOTIF!CA'J' oN
•	4	BRIEPIJt' ·, f:RSONNEL FILE ..		
	COUNSEL'S REllASf TO TllE BOARD
..\DD!TlOX \l:i.:x1 nB!7S Sl3MJ111'tJ\::,--"n',M,- E o;  ­	
	PER:',\Jl' Pd. ,\Y'ti..::.1 KAVCS	
'  ·1 ,'\f'\·Riz(·;Q;m1;,;;; Z'F Pl·:k: (Y>l;\l AP?ERANCI-: 1 fC ARl)!Ci--	

-+---/I   x	•

.,.: 1NDEXNl1MJ3t.N

,,,,:,;;;,;,  v ..··.,	UD'.Jts u 11

n"·  · ;r:':Jx.':-:   .J: ...;

A67.l0	1

ORDER /\Pl'OINTINO THE B01\IW

2	APPLlCATJO.N  FOR

REV!£W OF DfSCH ARtll::

; tl! ,u(,(I'<'(;rlATR
9 0CT 02

t·At Nlf\fRF'.R
:  FD2002-0194

.
Advise applieant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal  appearance witblwothout  counsel, and the right to submit an nppliclttion  to the A•'HCMR.

550 C STREET V..'EST. SLHTE 40
RAN l)(}LPH AFO, TX 1810-4742

AFIIQ Jioiu.t 0 2077, JAN 00	(EF-VZ)

Sf.CRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PFlmlNNEL COC NCIL
AlR FOCE J)l:S:t:HAROE  REVJ E\V 00..\RD l 53.5 C<)Mt..1ANDDR. Ef. \VINO, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, Ml) 2-0762-71l0l
------	Pw-1,-0-,,s-e-d,"it'-i,-o-n-,,i' ij be used

AIR FORCE DISCHA RGE REVTF:W BOARD DF:CTSTONA L RATIONA LR	

FD02-0194	

GF:NRRAL:  The applicant appeal s for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, Lo change t he Reason and Authority for discharge, and Lo change the RE Code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) hut declined to exerci se this right.

The attached brief comai ns the available peninent data on lhe applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is deni ed.

The board finds that neither evidence ofrecord nor that provided by the appli cant substan tiates an inequ i ty or impropriety, which would justi fy a change of discharge.

ISSUE:  The appl icant does not contest the discharge; he wants his discharge upgraded so he can reenter the Air f orce. He states that he now has a wile and a baby and t he mil itary would be the best thing for him because he is having a hard lime paying the bills and there is not much work in the area that he resides i n. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of im propriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records ind icated the applicant received five Letters' of Reprimand for failure to go, disobeying a lawful order, and being belligerent and verbally abu sive to a customer service representative at a local bank  He also received three AETC Form 34 1 's and three AETC l 73'sfor failure to go, dereliction of duty, failure to shave, insubordination, failing uniform inspection and
failure lo follow instructions and bei ng disrupti ve to the class.  The Board found no evidence of i mpropriety or inequity in thi s case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The Board concluded the miscond uct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

CONCL USIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludes t hat the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the d i scharge regulation and was within the d i scret ion of the discharge authority and that the appl icant was provided full ad ministrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings the board ll.1rther conclud es that there exists no legal or equitabl e basis for u pgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's d ischarge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief