AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN-

TYPE

YES	NO
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR OR.GANIZATION

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNS:i,

MEMBERS SITTING

VOTE OF THE llOARD

UOTflC

OTHER

Dl!:NY
x x x x
x

ISSUES
A92.35

HEARING DATE
18 Jul 03

INDEX NUMBER
A67.90

CASENUMRER
FD2003-00236

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
PLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

ASE TO THE BOARD

NG  OF PERSONAL  APPERANCE  HEARING APPLICANTS ISSUE AND ,THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARO PEC!S!ONAL RATIONALE.
REMARKS
Case hea rd at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicantirof 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 781504742

FROM:

DATE: 18 JUL 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 NlJ1BER

FD2003·00236	

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 the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.

The applicant's issues are listed in the attached brief.

Issue. The applicant states that his discharge was based on one incident in what were 35 months of otherwise exemplary service.  The DRB agreed that the applicant's discharge was based on a single series of incidents of misconduct; however, the Board found that the seriousness of that misconduct; i.e., adultery
and disobeying an order, outweighs the applicant's otherwise satisfactory service.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.

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, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief