AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

x

MEMBERS SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTllC

OTllER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES
A94.05

HEARING DATE

INDEX NUMJIER
A67.50

CASE NUMJIER

1
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRI	,OF PERSONNEL FILE

6 MAY 03

FD2002w0487	COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE 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
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM Ow2077, JAN 00	(EFWV2)	Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD02-0487	

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.

ISSUE: Applicant contends that his discharge was too harsh because he gave 15 years of his life to the military and needs his discharge upgraded. The record indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for driving while drunk. He also received a General Court Martial for resisting arrest, being drunk and disorderly, wrongfully communicating a threat to injure his wife, wrongfully communicating indecent language to his wife, failure to go, being disrespectful toward a superior officer, disobeyed a lawful order to not drink alcoholic beverages, and willfully damaging government property. 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. The Board found no evidence of any inequity or impropriety on which to base a decision to upgrade the 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