A IR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD--·-,----·
I    1'AME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LASr, FlRSr MIDOLE INITIAl.)	I     GRADE	. AFSN/SSAN

u	;11nr n	lA te

    _  	G_.--.--

.rnE	·	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	-=--	--1 ·x	RECORD REVIEW
_ - ' NA.fl.IE OF COUNSEL Ji.ND OR ORG/i.!lllZ.ATION	: ADDRESS AND OR ORGAl'>lZ.A TlON Ot' COLNSEl.
i    Yl:S	N11
x
- ----------------·---------------··

OTHER	DENY	

MEMBER SITTING

ISSUt:S	A93,ll

I   I
1·2 !   APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISC fl!>RGE ·	-

3_L HTER.OF NOT]FlCATI()N

.	.	_

-"•:.••"ct- 0AT.:---------1·cFA E N •M ..

----- ---------	t E:i {f	tiii	1TIME OF

080

2003

,,_200"'°00323

PERSONAL APPEAR ANCE
!-	------..-------

-+----------

Case heard at Wash ington, 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

SAf/MRBR
550C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

SEOTIARY OF nn:AIR FORCE PERSON:-<IEL COUNOL
AlR FORCE DISCHARGE ltt'\<'IBW BOARD
13.J COM,M_  D DR. EE '"'[NG. Jill FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD W.62·1002

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

CASE   UMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD2003-00323

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

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 is denied.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board wa unable to identify any.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. He had an Article 15, vacation of suspended punishment, and an Unfavorable Information File. His misconduct included misuse of his government travel card, writing a bad check to pay the resultant debt, failing to bring required documents to a scheduled financial counseling appointment, and misappropriating a sum of money from a civilian business. Member also had two Enlisted Performance Reports, the last of which was rated an overall referral "2." It referenced a Letter of Admonishment and several counseling sessions by member's supervisor and the First Sergeant for disobeying lawful orders, providing half truths, and being of questionable integrity. It also noted chronic financial problems led to the misuse of the government travel card, and continued bad judgment led to the vacation action. At the time of the discharge, member waived his right to consult counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf. The Board noted member was given several opportunities to correct his behavior but was either unwilling or unable to do so. Member was age 21 when his misconduct occurred, the same age as other airmen who honorably complete their service without misconduct. There ¥las no evidence he was immature, or didn't know right from wrong. The Board determined member was responsible for his actions and was held accountable for them. The Board did not find an inequity or impropriety that would warrant 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