AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

!        AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSl!:L AND OR ORGANIZATION

AllllRESS AND OR ORGANIZATJON OF COUNSEi,

MEMBERS SITTING
•	X
x
x x x

A92.21, A92.37, A93.07, A94.53

INDEX NUMBER
A67.IO	l	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIF!CAT!ON

HEARING DATE
10 JUN 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-00006

4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
SEL'S RELEASE TO nrn BOARD

Case hea rd 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 WE   ,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

FD2003-00006	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority for his discharge, and to change his reenlistment code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. Member received an Article 15, seven Letters of Reprimand, a Letter of Admonishment, and a Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included financial irresponsibility, violating dress and appearance standards, and assaulting his wife. At the time of the discharge, member consulted counsel and waived his right to submit a statement in his own behalf. The Board noted member was age 20 - 21 when his misconduct occurred, essentially the same age as other airmen who complete their enlistments without disciplinary infractions, and there was no evidence he did not know right from \\<Tong. His misconduct was disruptive, and its seriousness outweighed his otherwise satisfactory service. The Board did not find sufficient mitigation to warrant an upgrade, and no inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review. Therefore, the Board found the record supports the characterization of service received.

The applicant noted his desire to return to military service. While the Board commends applicant on this desire, and is sympathetic to the impact a General discharge has on his reenlistment code, this is not a matter of equity or propriety that warrants an upgrade.

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