AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARI NG RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAi.)	AFSN/SSAN
1                   $UiI	l llJlmU-.	bd'11ll ••
i     TYPE
PERSONAL APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

COUNSEL
YES	NO

NAME Of COUNSEL ANO OR ORGANIZATION ·- -----------A,D"o' RE=s

AN=D""°O'R""O""R' c; AN=1z=A T=10N O= (o"u"N'sn.---·

MEMBERS SITTING

x x x x

ISSUES
A93.0J

INDEX NUMBER
A67.10

11£ARlNG DATE
5 FEB 03

CASENUMB£R
FD2002·0239
3	
LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEi' OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RFLEASF TO Tl lE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTF.D AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

REMARKS
Case heard at Travis AFB, California.

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

SAF/MIBR
550 C STR EET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH APB. TX 78150-4742

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, .JAN 00	(EF-V2)

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3Ro FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
Previous edition will be used,

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0239	

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 to Honorable is denied.
The Board finds  that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify upgrade of the discharge.

The applicant's issues are listed in the attached brief.

ISSUES: The applicant contends that he should not be penalized  indefinitely for a mistake he made when he was young. The applicant was discharged  with a General  Discharge  for  Misconduct  Minor Disciplinary Infractions. The records indicated the applicant received seven  Letters  of Reprimand  for failure to obey a lawful order (twice), failure to pay a just debt, financial irresponsibility, and lying to his Supervisor, Superintendent and First Sergeant (four times). The DRB noted that the applicant was 24 years of age when the discharge took place. There is no evidence of record to indicate he was immature and did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was much older than the vast majority of first­ term members who properl y adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.

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 DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

Ifhe can provide additional documentation to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the board. If he should choose to exercise this right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service  accompl ishments as well as any contributions to the community.

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