AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVJCE MEMBER {LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAT)

-GRADE

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

YES	NO
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANl'.ZA TION

ADDRFSS AND OR ORGANl7.ATION OF COUNSEi.

MEMBERS SITTING

HON	GEN

VOTE OF TllE BOARD

UOTllC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

EX)iJJIITS SIJBMITTl>D TO TIU: :BOARD

A94.53

A67.90	l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LffITER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARJNG DATE
03-03-25

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0316

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
APJ>UCANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON TllE ATIACHED AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

RF.MARKS

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel. DD Form 149 submitted. The case will be forwarded to the AFBCMR for further processing.

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

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

FD2002-03 16	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board but decJincd to exercise this right

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrad e of discharge is denied.

The Board 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.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for misconduct, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. He had three Articles 15, a Letter of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling. Member also had an Enlisted Performance Report rated an overall referral "2." Member's misconduct included failing to report to work on time, playing computer games on his government computer during duty hours when told not to and there was work to be done, making a false official statement, driving on base while under revocation, and falling asleep on post while performing duties as a sentinel. At the time of the discharge, member submitted a statement in his own behalf requesting retention to his expiration of term of service. Member now agrees the things he did whi1e in service didn't meet military standards, but he feels he's been sufficiently "punished" and it has taught him a lesson. The Board notes that administrative separation is a separate and distinct action apart from any non-judicial proceeding or disciplinary action; it is an action that severs the military status of an individual and characterizes his service, but is not the same as punishment rendered for his misconduct. The Board further noted that when his misconduct occurred, member was the same age as other airmen who had adhered to the standards and he knew right from wrong, so he was held accountable for his actions. The Board felt member's misconduct was a serious departure from the standards expected of airmen as evidenced by the fact the reason for his discharge was "conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline." The Board could find no wrongful action by the Air Force, nor an inequity that would warrant an upgrade.

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: Examiner1s Brief