AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (J,AST, FIRST MIDDU:INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

X  RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND QR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

x x x x x

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVJEW OF DISCHARGE

HEARING DATE
10 JAN 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0355

3	LETrER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITIED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPF;RANCE HEARING

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
I535 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

FD2002-0355	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to General, change of reason for discharge, and change ofreenlistment eligibility (RE) code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) 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 neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.

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

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because "it was  too  harsh".  The  information provided by the applicant and contained in his records was carefully reviewed by the DRB. The records indicated the applicant received three Article 15's for misconduct. The misconduct included dereliction of duty, failure to go, making a false official statement and wrongfully using a Government Cellular Phone. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the  applicant  was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2. Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, and other information contained in the records. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

·	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, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief