AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X    RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZA110N	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF C0UN$1:L

MEMBERS SITTING

VOTE OF THE BOARD

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTlllJ:R

OENY
x x x x x

ISSUES

lNDEX NUMBl:R

EXff lBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD

A94.05

A67. 10	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTJFICA TION

HF.ARING DATE

CASE NUMBER

4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

21 FEB 03

FD2002-0342	COUNSEL'S R F.LEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME m
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APl'ERANCE HEARING
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND nm llOAAD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON TiiE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.
REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applica nt of the decision of the Boa rd, t he right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to
submit an application to the AFBCMR.

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

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

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD020342	

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 the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends that his discharge was too harsh because it was based on an appeal for the non· judicial punishment that dropped him two pay-grades instead of the intended one pay-grade. He also states that his discharge was for financial instability and that his commanding officer neglected to properly review his military file. The record indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for writing bad checks. He also received three Records of Individual Counseling for failure to go twice, and dereliction of duty; and two Letters of Reprimand for failure to go on two occasions and failure to obey an order. The Board found no evidence of any inequity or impropriety on which to base a decision to upgrade the discharge. 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