AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER {LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AB

AFSN/SSAN

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
A67.10

HEARING DATE
22 JULY 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-00122

LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FlLE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDmONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL   APPEARANCE

REMARKS

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.

SAFIMIBR
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, 3RP 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

FD2003-00122	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority for the 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 the discharge, and change of reenlistment code are 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 a Letter of Counseling, three Letters of Reprimand, two Articles 15, vacation of suspended punishment, and an Unfavorable Information File.  His misconduct included a failed room inspection, failure to obey an order to have required equipment in good order, financial irresponsibility, failure to maintain a professional appearance  on  duty,  twice stealing currency belonging to others, writing bad checks, and being disorderly and disrespectful to a senior ranking airman. At the time of the discharge, member waived his right  to consult counsel and 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 in the course of the records review.

While the Board commends applicant on his desire to return to military service, 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's dischaige should not be changed.	.·;

Attachment: Examiner's Brief