_ \
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

AFSN/SSAN

1    rr11•11111111

PERSONAL APPEARANCE	X    RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

MEMBERS SITTING

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

x x x x

INDEX NUMBER
A94.S3	A67.10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
1	

HEARING DATE
22 JUL 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-00074

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and 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 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2003-00074	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

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:  Upgradt of discharge is denied.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. He had two Letters or Records of Individual Counseling, five Letters of Reprimand, an Article 15, and an Unfavorable Information File. He was also placed on the Control Roster and had an Enlisted Performance Report rated an overall "3." His misconduct included five occasions of failure to go, failure to pay just debts, operating a privately owned vehicle without the required permit, and abandoning a privately owned vehicle on which he still carried a loan. At the time of the discharge, member consulted counsel but waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf. The Board noted member was the same age as other airmen who had adhered to the standards when his misconduct occurred, and he knew right from wrong. He was counseled in an effort to help him correct his deficiencies and had several opportunities to improve his behavior. He failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. He was responsible for his actions, and therefore held accountable for them. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge inthe course of the records review.

CONCLUSIONS : The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural a11-d substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was witliin 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