'	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

X  PERSONAL APPEARANCE	RECORD  REVIEW
NAME 01' COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION 01' COUNSJl:L

MEMBERS SITTING

x x x x

INDEX.  NUMBER
A94.06, AOl.39, AOI.43	A 64.00

t	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING DATE
050603

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0486

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the Board's decision.

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.

Kris Hasenberg,

Gregory Henley,

Walter E. Orzolick

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0486		

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for an upgrade of his Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge to general.  The applicant appeared and testified before the Board without counsel, at Andrews AFB, MD, on May 6, 2003.

The applicant submitted character statements from MSgt	MSgt	and TSgt
.

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data on the applicant, the factors leading to the discharge, and the issues he submitted for review.

FINDINGS:  The applicant's request to change the characterization of his discharge to general is granted.

Issue:  The applicant contends that his overall service record is more deserving of a general discharge rather than the Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge he received.  The applicant's record contains numerous counselings and a reprimand for operating his car at excessive speeds.  He was apprehended by civilian authorities for driving 95 miles per hour and cited for reckless driving.  He was later convicted of that offense and directed to attend a court-ordered traffic school.  When he failed to attend the school, local authorities incarcerated him for 21 days. Base authorities apprehended the applicant on two occasions for traveling at excessive speeds on base.  These infractions led to additional adverse action and the loss of his base driving privileges.  Despite receiving an order not to drive on base, base police apprehended the applicant driving his car on base.  For this, he received nonjudicial punishment.  Other misconduct in the  file included evidence the respondent failed to meet his financial obligations.  He wrote a worthless check, had his car repossessed, and fell behind in his Delayed Payment Program account with the Base Exchange. Lastly, the respondent received a second Article 15 for removing stereo equipment he had installed from the car which had been repossessed.  The respondent removed the stereo equipment at night and without permission. While not condoning his misconduct, the Board also noted the counselings he received were typical of the type received by first-term airmen.  The Board noted the applicant believed he was reclaiming his own property from the repossessed car and he re-installed the original radio.  In the Board's view, these
facts mitigated what they would otherwise have considered to be a very serious offense.  Finally, the Board
observed the respondent supplied three character references from senior noncommissioned officers which praised the respondent's service.  After a thorough and complete consideration of the information provided by the applicant, the applicant's compelling testimony, and the information contained in the record, the DRB concluded there were sufficient extenuating and mitigating circumstances to substantiate an upgrade to the applicant's discharge to general.  The Board does not believe his record justifies  a further upgrade to his service.

None of the applicant's remaining issues will be addressed as their resolution in the applicant's favor would not result in greater relief than is being afforded by the Board.

The Board also reviewed and considered the applicant's entire service record before making a decision.

CONCLUSIONS:  The Board concludes the respondent's discharge characterization should be upgraded	

Attachment: Examiner's Brief	

 	 	

from Under Other Than Honorable Conditions to general.