AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
a	I Id
x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDlitESS AND OR OKGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

Upgrade  Discharge

Deny Deny Deny Deny Deny

ISSUES

A95.00

REARING DATE

INDEX NtTMllElt

A67.90	2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF

12 Aug 2003

FD-2003-00291

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

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

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANOOLPH AFB, TX 781504742

FROM:

SECK£TAaY OF THE AIR FORCE l'ERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHAllGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DI!, EE WING, 31W FLOOK ANDREWS AFB, MD 1117'2-7002

AFHQ  FORM  0-2077, JAN  00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2003-00291	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: UpgFade of Discharge is denied.

The Board fmds \he applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge. i

ISSUE: The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review by completed based on the available service record. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge. The records indicated applicant received two Article 15s for DWI and for having a minor in his dormitory room. He also received a Vacation action under the UCMJ for failure to go. Additionally, he received one Letter of Reprimand and three Letters of Counseling for an unauthorized absence, unsatisfactory CDC performance, dereliction of duty, unprofessional  conduct and using profane language, and for wearing an earring on a military installation. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative/repetitive behavior. The  Board concluded the disciplinary infractions were 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.

Attaclunent: Examiner's Brief