AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING  R ECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

Al<SN/SSAN

AlC

YJ;S	NO
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X    RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANlZATION OF COUNSEL

YOTE OF THE BOA.RD
MEMBERS SITTING	llON	GEN	UOTHC

DE.NY
x x x x x

EXH.mrrs SUBMITTE:QoTO'.flIE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

HEARING DATE
1 AUG 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0187

3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHlBITS SUBMITTED AT  TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING  Of  PERSONAL  APPERANCE   HEARfNG 1\l'PLICANT'S ISSUE AND tf!E.BOARJYS DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE mseusssn:ON TI1B ATTACHE!) AIR FQRGlfI)lSQiAAGE  ll.EVUiW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

REMARKS
Case hea rd 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.

DATE: 1AUG 03

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNClL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RV 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	CASF. NUMBER

FD03-0187	

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 contaiJ the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.	.,

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of   ischarge is denied.
j
The board finds that niither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity
\>r impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends that his discharge was too harsh because he believes he was innocent of underage drinking and having someone living in his dorm room.  The  record  indicates  the  applicant received an Article  15 for willfully failing to refrain from drinking alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21 and for driving while drunk. In addition, he received three Letters of Reprimand and two Letters of Counseling for being late for duty, disobeying a direct order, cutting a screen to evade security forces, being disrespectful to individuals and drinking under age, and for allowing an unescorted person to reside in the barracks and wander the installation. 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 applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief

.	.	J
i	'
'