AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) 	

AFSN/SSAN
111 m•1•

x	RECORD REVIEW

x

x

TYPE

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

-

GRADE

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

YES

No
x

MEMBER SITTING

x

x

ISSUES

A93.0l

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

3
4

APPLJCATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
LETTER OF NOTJFICATION

BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

---<

1--
HEARING DATE
21 Nov 2003

f--
CASE NUMBER
FD-2003-00384

1---1-COU=N:S.=E=L'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

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

-;;

SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 10762·7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2003-00384	

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 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 that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant does not contest his discharge. He states that he was young and immature at the time of his actions. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for assaulting another airman. Additionally, he received a Letter of Reprimand for a civil arrest for assault. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 20 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

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	

;