AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDl.E INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

AlC

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRl:SS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSU

x
·	x
x x x
A72.00	I	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

JIEARING DATE
lO JUN 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-001l0

3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
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 applica nt 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 STRE	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

FD2003-00110	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to general (under honorable conditions).

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 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 received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge pursuant to his request to be discharged in lieu of trial by court martial for stealing merchandise from the base exchange (BX). Member also had a Letter of Reprimand for having an inappropriate relationship with a technical school trainee while he was a permanent party member assigned to the same base, a Record of Individual Counseling for financial irresponsibility, and an Article 15 for a previous incident of stealing merchandise from the BX. Additionally, two memos for record documented two instances in which member was late to work. Although this misconduct was not the reason for which he was discharged, it can be considered in determining the appropriate characterization of member's service. Additionally, according to the record, member failed to meet weight and fitness standards and was "questionable" on his dress and appearance standards. Applicant infers that he should not be penalized indefinitely as a result of his discharge status and notes potential future employment options are adversely affected by his characterization of discharge. While the Board is sympathetic to applicant's circumstances, they noted that when he voluntarily submitted his request for discharge in lieu of trial by court martial he acknowledged in doing so his characterization of service could be deemed under other than honorable conditions. In making this request, the applicant avoided the possibility of a federal conviction , and his request to be administratively discharged was granted. In accordance with discharge regulations, airmen discharged under these circumstances usually do have their service characterized as UOTHC. The Board concluded applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and could find no inequity or impropriety in the course of the records review upon which to base a change in his discharge.

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 app1icant 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.

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: Examiner1s Brief	

' <