j	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE ME!\.IBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X    RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRll:SS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

BON

GEN
x x x x x

ISSUES
A93.11

INPEX NllMBtR
A67.90

1	ORDER APPOINTING TIIE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

HEARING DATE
6APR 03

CASE NUMBER
FDlOOl--0483

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
RATIONALE:'

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

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.

z=

,  Dal'E: 16APR 03

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

SECRETARY OF THE AlR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AlR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD02-0483	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable and change the Reason and Authority for discharge.

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 does not contest his discharge. He states that it was because of financial irresponsibility and that he was trying to support his parents. The record indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for forging a signature on a loan application and for writing bad checks.  In addition, he received three Letters of Reprimand for financial irresponsibility, falsifying an application by impersonating an officer to lease a vehicle and driving  with a suspended license.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. The Board found no evidence of any inequity or impropriety on which to base a decision to upgrade the discharge.

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