AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
'    '

I
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

-GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL

APPEARANCI!:

X  RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

MEMBERS SITTING

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANlZA TION OF COUNSEL

x x x x

HEARING DATE
03-01-10

INDEX NUMBER
A67.90

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0237

I ORDER APPOINTING TIIE BOARD
2	APPLJCA TION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFJCATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FJLE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TIIE BOARD
ADDmONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT  TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SAF/M
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

AFllQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DJSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
Previous edition will be used,

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0237	

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

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, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for a pattern  of misconduct, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. He had four Records of Individual Counseling, two Letters of Reprimand (LOR), an Article 15, an Unfavorable Information File, a referral  Enlisted Performance Report rated an overall ''2," and was placed on the Control Roster. His misconduct included four instances of failure to go, and three instances of financial irresponsibility, and lying to his commander, al1 in a 12-month period of time. At the time of the discharge, applicant waived his right to submit statements on his own behalf, after consulting counsel. Member was sent to the Personal Financial Management Program twice, but was not however motivated enough to conform to standards and his misconduct continued. The Board also noted that when his misconduct occurred, member was the same age as other ainnen who had adhered to the standards. He was counseled in an effort to help him correct his deficiencies and had many opportunities to improve his behavior. He failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts, so he was held accountabJe for his actions. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

Applicant cited his desire to return to military service as justification for an upgrade. While the Board commends applicant on this desire to return to military service, and is sympathetic to the impact a General discharge has on his reenlistment code, this is not a matter of equity or propriety that warrants an upgrade.

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