AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

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

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	D REVIEW
E OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDltESS AND OR ORGANrtA TION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

x x x x

ISSUES
A94.05

INDEX NVMB£R
A67.10	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

Br.ARING DATE
7 AUG 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0045	O THE BOARD

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.

r-	· -
l

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD03-0045	

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.	.t.

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 does not contest his discharge. He states that he wants to better his education. The record indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for being incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties due to overindulgence in liquor. He also received a Letter of Reprimand for underage drinking and dereliction of duty. The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification for upgrade. The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety that would warrant an upgrade. 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