AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, l<'IRST MIDDLE INITL\L)

-GRADE

AFSN/SSAN 	

& Ill11111 It I

PERSONAL APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

x

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADORESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING	OrHER

x

DENY
x x x x

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO TllE BOARD

AOl.00 A95.00 A93.01

A67. 10	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING Oi>.TE
22 MAY 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-00042

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TllE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TllvfE OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

REMAII.KS
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, 31ID 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

FD2003-00042	

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 to Honorable is denied.

The Board finds that the evidence ofrccord does not substantiate an inequity or impropriety that would justify an upgrade of the discharge.

Issues.  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 upon which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records indicated the applicant was discharged in November  1989 with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for minor disciplinary infractions.  Member had one Article 15 for making a false official statement to civilian law enforcement officers about his car where he reported it stolen while he knew he had arranged for its disposal, one Article 15 for dereliction of duty for negligently failing to deliver priority work and LOGAIR
in a timely manner as required, one Letter of Reprimand and a security violation for leaving classified cargo unattended without proper security measures, and one Record oflndividual Counseling for running a stop sign on base.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.   Ifhe can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance  before the Board.  If he should choose to exercise his right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post­ service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.  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.

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.

Inview 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