.I

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL A". ID OR ORCAN11ATION

ME.MBERS SITTING

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

Jll •a ir
X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COllNSF.L

x x x
·	x
x

ISSUE.'I
A92.37, A93.11, A94.53

INDEX NUMBER
A67. 10	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

HEARING DATE
02-10-03

CA.Sf; NUMBER
FD2002-0189

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT  TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARJNG

R:MARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel. DD Form 149 submitted.  Case will be fonvarded to the AFBCMR for further processing.

SAf/lllR
550 C STREET WES , RANDOLPH AFB,

SECRETARY OF THE AJR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING, 31ll) FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 207627002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0l89	

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:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds the 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.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. He had a Letter  of Counseling,  a Letter of Reprimand, an Article 15, an Unfavorable Information File, and had been placed on the Control Roster. His misconduct included failure to go, writing five worthless checks, sleeping on duty, and misappropriating a POV owned by another airman. At the time of the discharge, member waived his right to submit a statement in his own behalf, according to a note in the file. Applicant submits no issues now and some of the discharge documents  are missi ng from the file. The Board noted that member was the same age as other airmen who adhere to the standards when his misconduct occurred, and he knew right from wrong. He was sent to the Personal Financial Management Program and placed on the Control Roster in an effort to help him correct his deficiencies. He was mature and responsi ble for his actions,  and therefore was held accountable for them. Although he was counseled and given several opportunities to improve his behavior, he failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent wit h 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