AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

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

AFSN/SSAN

SRA

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATJON
YES	NO
x

X  RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

HON
x x x x x

VOTE OF THE BOARD GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

HEARING DATE
26 AUG 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-0300

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
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
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATIACHED AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

REMARKS
Case hea rd at Washington, D.C.

Advise a pplicant of the decision of the Boa rd.

SIGNATURE  OF RECORDER

INDORSEMENT	DATE: 26 AUG 03
TO:	FROM:

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	CASE NUMBER

FD-2003-00300	

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 available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS: The Board grants the requested relief.
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon the record and evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Article l 5s, the first one for failure to have his dorm room in inspection order and the second for writing bad checks. Additionally, he received four Letters of Reprimand for failure to obey several lawful orders, missing two dental appointments, failure to obey an order and for financial irresponsibility. The DRB opined that the applicant should have been given financial counseling instead of 15 days extra duty and a reprimand, followed by a discharge. The Board concluded the misconduct in regards to the bad checks was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. But, the overall characterization of the discharge should reflect an Honorable discharge and Secretarial Authority.

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.

However, in view of the  foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality  of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and the reason for the discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief