MEMBER SIITING

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL APPEARAN CE	GRADE
	AFSN/SSAN	
	RECORD REVIEW	
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIUTION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCO\JNSl!L	

				X+*	
				X+*	
				X+*	
				X+*	
				X+*	
ISSlltS	A93.11
A94.55	INDEX NU MB.ER	A62.00		
				I	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
				2	APPLJCATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
				3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION	
				4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
					COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
					ADDITIONAL EXHffiITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
					TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HEARING	
H£AJIJNG DATE

02 Jul 2013	C-ASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00222		

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR. Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.
+Reason and Authority
*Reenlistment Code

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PEltSONNELCOUNC IL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ISJS COMMAND DR, EE WING,3RD FLOOR ANDR.l!WS AFB,MD 20762·7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077,JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00222	

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB),  without  counsel,  at Andrews AFB on 02 Jul 2013.

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

FINDING:  Upgrade  of  the  discharge,  change  of  reason  and  authority  for  discharge,  and  change  of reenlistment code are 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 1: The applicant was discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for Fraudulent Entry. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was unfair. He also states that it was a clerical error or oversight that he and his recruiter left some important information off his  Questionnaire for National Security Position (SF-86). He also testified he would never have intentionally covered up his financial state because he knew a record check would be performed.  He also testified that his recruiter instructed him not to fill out his security forms completely because they were on a tight deadline due to him shipping out for Basic Training in April of 2008. The applicant did provide a letter from his    recruiter; however her letter didn't provide any details that support the applicant's contentions. The record indicates that during his initial enlistment into the Air Force Reserve, applicant fraudulently made statements
and later signed official documents regarding financial delinquencies and legal issues that the applicant knew were false. A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. The Board found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge.   The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

ISSUE 2: Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because he was denied a face to face for his demotion action and discharge. He feels had he had a chance to explain his case and present supporting evidence, the outcome would have been different. The Board was sympathetic to the applicant's plight, but determined the applicant was not entitled to an Administrative Discharge  Board due to his less than four years of service. Additionally, there was no evidence presented to show applicant was barred from speaking to his commander. The applicant submitted evidence that he was denied participation for points and pay, but this did not preclude presenting his case to the commander in person. The Board found no impropriety in the notification and processing  of the applicant's administrative discharge.  The Board found applicant's claim of inequity unsubstantiated.

ISSUE 3: The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job.  However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing. The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

CONCLUSION: 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 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief