AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

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

TYPE

111 11••••11 11

AIC

I - IRll

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS   AND  OR  ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL
YES	NO
x

MEMBERS  SITTING	HON	GEN

VOTE OF TilE :QOARl>

uo

x x

ISSUES
A01.00;A95.00

HEARING DATE

INDEX NUMBER
A67. 10

CASE NUMBER

1
2
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

18 Jul 03

FD2003-00244	COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TIIE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE l'IOAlµ:l'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON'TilE ATTACHED AlR FOR

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
RATl0NA!£

Advise applicant of the decision of the Boa rd, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

DATE: 18 JUL 03

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOAR D
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3Ro FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EFV2)	Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2003-00244	

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 Board finds that the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the board was able to identify none.  The records indicated the applicant received one Article 15, nine Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Counseling for misconduct. The misconduct included failure to obey a lawful order, late for work, financial
irresponsibility, and dereliction of duty.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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