AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECRD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, l•IRST MIUDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE

AMN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
YES	NO
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

llON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES
A93.09

HEARING DATE
IAUG 03

INDEX NUMBICR
A67.10

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0166

EXHIBITS SUBMrrnn TO tHl!l BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISC! IARGE
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
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

REMARKS
Case hea rd at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Boa rd, the right to a personal appea rance with/without cou nsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

TO:	FROM:
SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AfB, TX 78150-4742

DATE:  1AUG 03

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

FD03-0166	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the Reason and Authority for discharge and to change the RE Code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) 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 does not contest his discharge. He just wants his discharge upgraded so that he can enlist in the U.S. Army. The record indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go on three separate occasions and a Vacation action on a suspended reduction under the UCMJ. In addition, he received seven Letters of Reprimand and two Letters of Counseling for being late for duty on numerous occasions, missing appointments and reporting to work without all of the required equipment. Wanting to enlist in the U.S. Army is no reason to change a discharge. Also, the U.S. Army may waive the Air Force RE Code if they so desire. 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 applicanf s discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief

•i