AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL}

AFSN/SSAN

'  YES
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS ANfl OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

HON	GUI

VOTE OF THEtlOA:IU)

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

EXHlalTSSUBMl'.fll!;ltTO  THE llOAlID

A93.0l

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

HEARING DATE
19 FEB 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0415

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL Al'l'ERANCE HEARING
AP!ll;IJi)l'.\ll!T'S ISSUE AND TllE'.B.OARI:l'S l'.>llCISIONAL RAT!Ol'IAL ARE DISJ?l) ON THE AITACHED AIR FORCEDl$CHARGEREVIBW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE,

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.

SAFfMIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

DATE: }9 FEB 03
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AJR 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

FD02-0415	

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 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 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: The applicant does not contest the discharge; he states that he cannot change the past but the mistakes he made when he was younger helped him to learn to take responsibility for his actions. Tbe record indicates the applicant received two Article's 15 for failure to go and driving while intoxicated, and a Vacation of a suspended nonjudical punishment for attempting to steal the refund for a keg and tap. In addition, he received two Memorandum's for Record, a Record of Individual Counseling, and three Letter's of Reprimand for underage drinking, playing loud music in his dorm room, failure to report for duty and being late for work numerous times. The DRB recognized the applicant was 21 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was older then the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons that were the basis for this case. No inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the records review. His misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The Board concluded that the character and reason for discharge were appropriate due to his misconduct.

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 or change the reason for discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief