NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

.GRAD.E

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

COUNSEL ·
YES	NO
x

NA1'1E OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATlON OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF TIU! BOARD
MEMBERS SITTING	llON	GEN	UOTBC

OTHER

DENY
x x x

x

EXHIBJIS SUBMITTED TO.l'flE·BOARD
A95.00	A67.IO		ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

JIEARING DATE
9 MAY 03

CASl:. NUMBER
FD2002-0461

LETrER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL Fl LE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE HOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
Al'Pl;ICANT'S iSSUE	p U:l,!i'i!cOi\JUJ'S DECISIONAu.R(\llO!llAL .AJlE msctissEii o THE ATTACHED AIR FOR.Cl> PJSCHARGE REVIEW 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.

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

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DlSCHARGE 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 NUMBRR

FD02-0461	

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 the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge,  and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was able to identify none that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:  The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record.  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 records indicated applicant had two Article 15's, one for being derelict in the performance of his duties in that he willfully failed to refrain from drinking alcoholic beverages while he was assigned stand-by duties.  The other was for failure to go and derelict in the performance of his duties.  He also received a Vacation action under the UCMJ and a Letter of Reprimand and a Memorandum for Record for being disorderly and providing a false statement.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative/repetitive behavior.  The Board concluded the disciplinary infractions were a significant departure from the 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.

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