AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEl\IIBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

X	RECORD REVIEW

AFSNISSAN

YES	llo
x

ADDR£SS AND OR ORCANIZATION Of COUNSCL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

X*+

X*+

X*+

X*+

ISSUES

A94.ll A94.01

INDEX NUMBER

A67.30 A67 .90

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNELFILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMIITED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

X*+

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

01 May 2014

FD-2014-00023

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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

+ CHANGE REASON AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY

S   •	BR
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150 4742

SECRETARY Of THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DlSCHARCE RCVIEW 80ARI) 1535 COMMAND OR,£E WINC, JRO FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD!07'1-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00023	

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 was offered a personal  appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

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

FINDING:	The  Board  denies  the  upgrade  of  discharge,  to  change  the  reason  and  authority  for  the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

ISSUE:	Applicant  received  a General  discharge  characterization  for Misconduct:	Serious  Offense  and Failure to Show Acceptable Qualities of Leadership.

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable and improper because he did not commit the alleged offenses that lead to him being discharged from the Air Force.  The applicant also asks that the Board considers his career contributions and recognize that his true character is not consistent with the allegations.  The records indicated the applicant was under investigation by AFOSI for wrongfully and fraudulently representing his involvement in financial transactions with Butler County Nebraska Ethanol, LLC; wrongful appropriation of
$400,000.00 of currency, the property of Mr. Stein Revelsby and Norden Technologies; wrongful appropriation of $200,000.00 of currency, the property of Mr. Anthony C. DiMarco and Mr. "Skip" DiMarco; devising a scheme for obtaining money from Mr. Stein Revelsby under false pretenses; and devising a scheme for obtaining money from Mr. Anthony C. DiMarco under false pretenses.  The DRB opined that the above listed misconduct is serious for which the applicant could have been found guilty of and punished by a court-martial.  The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant, reason and authority for the discharge, and the reenlistment code was found to be appropriate.

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, changing the reason and authority for the discharge, or changing the reenlistment code and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief