AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICJi: MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AJ C

AFSN/SSAN
••1	II

:   YES	NO
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION .

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

llON

GEN

VOIT. OF THE BOARD

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

EXHIBITS SUBMITfltl> TO THE BOARII

I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
i    2

HEARING DATE
1 AUG 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0167

3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATJON
4		BRIEF OP PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITl'Ef) AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE Rf.CORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
APU AN'f'S ISSUE AND Tt!E BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE: REVIEW BOARD DECISlONAL RATIONALE.

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

FROM:

.  DA'J".Jlk  1AUG03

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 REVlEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD03-0167	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

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:  The applicant believes that his discharge would automatically be upgraded in six months.  The records indicated applicant received a General Discharge for failure to complete the alcohol abuse rehabilitation treatment program and for misconduct.  He received an Article 15 for failure to go and a Vacation action on a suspended action under the UCMJ.  In addition, he received three Letters of Reprimand and two Records of Individual Counseling for failing his room inspection, being late for work, missing scheduled appointments, dereliction of duty and failure to go.  Finally, he failed the alcohol abuse rehabilitation treatment program.  The Board noted the issue of automatically upgraded a discharge in six months was common, the result of miscommunication.   While a discharge may be upgraded after six months, the upgrade is by no means automatic.  A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the ORB can establish an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  In this case, none was found, so the Board denied the appeal.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from the conduct expected of all military members.  The Board found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of 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 applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief
I	4..