AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME QI<' SERVICE MEMBER (tAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

AB

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

X  RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANJl.ATION OF COUNSli:L

MEMBERS SITTING

HON
x x x x x

GEN

VOTE OF'IllE BOARD

uornc

OTHER

DENY

HEARING DAn;
l AUG 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0152

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO TllE J!OARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER Of NOTJFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADf)ITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECOIUJ!NG OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
Al'l'LICANT'S ISSUE'ANP1lffi.BOARD'S Di1tlSf!i>NAL RATIONAL' PlSCUSSEJJONTHI! ATTACHED AJR !'OR.CE DISCHARG!! REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONAl,E.

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Boa rd.

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCI L 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

FD03-001	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for an Honorable Discharge.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right

The attached brief contain;the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.
t
FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge to Honorable is approved.

ISSUE: Applicant cpntends that his discharge was too harsh because it was based on one isolated incident in 36 months of ser'Vice. The records indicate the applicant was discharged with a General discharge for Misconduct conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.  After  a  thorough  and  complete consideration of the information submitted by the applicant and information contained in the record, the Board concluded there was sufficient mitigation and extenuation to substantiate upgrade of the discharge. Members are not normally discharged for DWI and it appears that there was a misunderstanding concerning the applicant's departure from the Correctional facility.

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.

However, in view of the foregoing finding, the  Board further concludes that the overall quality of the applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an honorable discharge. The Board concluded that the Reason and Authority of the applicant's discharge should be changed to Secretarial Authority.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief