t

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

X  RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING
x x x
x
x

INDEX NUMBER
A93.0l, A93.19	A67.50

2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HJ:ARING DATE
28 MAR 03

CASE NUMBER
FDlOOl-0450

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

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.

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

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

FD020450	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the Reason and Authority for discharge and to change the 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 th' available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrade o'f discharge, change in Reason and Authority, and change to the RE Code 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 states the record is in error or unjust because his ability to serve was impaired by his youth and immaturity.  He states that he had problems coping with social acceptability.  The record  indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for willfully violating curfew and was smoking in an unauthorized area and therefore, failed to adhere to the phase program.  In addition, he also received three Letters of Reprimand for violation of curfew restrictions, walking with his hands in his pockets and displaying a bad attitude, and for having a physical altercation with another airman and being drunk and disorderly.  And, he received  10 AETC Forms 341 and one Letter of Counseling for failing his dorm room inspection (8 times), needed a haircut, and violated security standards.  The applicant contends that he should not be penalized for a mistake he made when young.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 22 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 firstwterm members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  The board concluded the  misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The Board found  no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge and that the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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