AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

i    NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER  (LAST, f<IRST MIDDLE INITIAi.)

!         GRADE	•   AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x  RECORD R EVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIL\TION	ADDRJLSS AND OR ORGANIZA TJON OF COUNSEL
NO
x

MEMBERS SITTING

IJON	GEN

VOTE OF nu:BOARD

UOTHC

OTHER	OENY
x x x x x

HEARING DATE
11 JUL 03

INDEX NUMBER
A67.90

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0097

EXHIBITS SUBMl'ITED TO.TJIE BQARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLJCATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFJCA TION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S R ELEASE TO THE BOARD
/\ODITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIM.E OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
APPl.ICANT'S ISSUE ANDTIIE BOARD'S DECISIQN RATIONAL Al(E!\ISCUSSED ON Tl:!E.AlTACHED AIR:.f.01\CE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

REM<\RKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applica nt of the decision of the Boa rd, the right to a personal appea rance 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 AJR 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 NIJMBER

FD03-0097	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) 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 states that his discharge was too harsh and improper because he bel ieves he was punished for both incidents prior to being discharged. The record indicates the appl icant received two Articles 15. One for wrongfully entering a local area hotel and wrongfully using some amount of marJJUana. The other one for driving while intoxicated. The Board confirmed that the applicant's command had processed the case properly and that the case file was legally sufficient to support the discharge with a General characterization. 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