AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

An	l•nill  r
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X  RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

SITTING
x x x x x

INDEX NUMBER
A92.21,A92.35, A93.01	A67.10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
2	
HEARING DATE
4	JUN 03

CASE NVM.BER
FD2003-00109

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

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/MlBR
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, 31t1> 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

FD2003-00109		

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority for his discharge, and to change his reenlistment code.

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: Upgrade · of discharge, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. Member received an Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand, and a Letter of Admonishment. His misconduct included financial irresponsibility, disclosing classified information, violating female dormitory visitation rules, and assaulting a female military member. At the time of the discharge, member consulted counsel and submitted a statement in his own behalf requesting retention, or in the alternative, an opportunity for probation and rehabilitation. Member's commander weighed heavily member's request but had "little confidence" member would be able to "maintain overall military standards for an extended period of time." After each instance in which member assured his  commander no further incidents would occur, the misconduct continued. Consequently, his commander felt he had not shown the "desire to modify his behavior" when given the chance. The Board noted member was age 20 - 21 when his misconduct occurred, essentially the same age as other airmen who complete their enlistments without disciplinary infractions, and there was no evidence he did not know right from wrong. His misconduct was disruptive, and its seriousness outweighed his otherwise satisfactory service. The Board did not find sufficient mitigation to warrant an upgrade, and no inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review. Therefore, the Board found the record supports the characterization of service received.

The applicant noted he is now serving in the Army National Guard and cited his desire to return to service in the Navy. While the Board commends applicant on this desire, and is sympathetic to the impact a General discharge has on his reenlistment code, this is not a matter of equity or propriety that warrants an upgrade.

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 1s discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief