AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	-

X  RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

NAMJ: OF COUNSl:L AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS  SITTING	DENY
x x x x x

ISSUl:S	INDEX NUMJIER
A93.0I	A67.30

l
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETfER OF NOTIFICATION

BEARING DATE
9 APR 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0037

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

RKS
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.

,.E/4--.........·--

SIGNATllRE OF RECORDER

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  0-2077, JAN  00	(EF V2)	Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD03-0037	

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 he should not be penalized  indefinitely  for a mistake  he  made  when young. The record indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for:  with intent to defraud, falsely pretend to AT & T operators that certain telephone numbers were his home telephones and that he was authorized to charge long distance telephone calls to these numbers. He also received a Letter of Reprimand for being drunk on station and disorderly conduct and had his on-base driving privileges revoked due to driving with a suspended license. The DRB recognized the applicant was 21 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 first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct. If the applicant can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make  a personal  appearance before the Board. Ifhe should choose to exercise this right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary postM service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.

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