!  NAME O.F SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

1      TYPE

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

COUNSEL, .
YES	·NO

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

x

VOTE OF THE BOARD

HON

GEN

UOUiC

OTHER

DENY

x

x

3

LETTER OF NOTll'lCATION

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0066

4

BRIEF OF PERONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S Ra.1:'A-SE-T""""--=TI=i=E-=B-0-.: A-,R,."D"' ------;
ADDITTONAL EXHIBJTS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE

..

GRADE	Al•SN/SSAN 	

•IIR JI lllt

·	·	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	X     RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

x
x

x

EXHIBITS SIJBMIITED TO	ARD

2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF OISCHARGE

HEARJNG DATE
24 JUN 03

---    !

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE  HEARING
APLl('),Alf' f'S ISllcAlW THE BOARD'S D£\"!$JQ"1- RATIONAL ARE DISFUSSED ON Tiili ATTACHED AlR'fORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAi'" RATIONALE.

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Adviseapplicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a persona l appearance with/without cou nsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

	

DATE: 24 JUN 03	
SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR 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	CASJ; NUMBER

FD03-0066	

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 does not contest his discharge.  He merely wants an honorable discharge for the purpose of using his VA benefits.   The record indicates the applicant received two Article  1    both for failure to go. He also received three Letters of Reprimand for financial irresponsibility and for being late for duty. In addition, he received four Records of Individual Counseling for being late for duty (twice) and financial irresponsibility (twice). 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 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