"	AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD HE ARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	NISSAN
-
.	Al C
TVPE   GEN	I	PERSONA  L  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANlZA TION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COU.'iSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

---·-·-
HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DEN Y
x
-
x
-
x
-
x
-
x
ISSll F:S	A92.36	INDEX NUMBER	A67.50	EXHIBITS  SUBMITTED  TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR  REVIEW  OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER  OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FI LE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
i	PERSONAL   APPEARANCE
I	TA PE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
I HEA RING DATE	(.'ASE   1''lJMBER
12 Aug 2005	FD-2005-00120
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUS:SED ON 11IE ATTACHEJJ AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

""	-	•
11'11){)11$1!:N!ENt	.	DATE:    8/1212005
--
TO:	FROM:
SAE/MRBR	SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL  COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD

550 C STREET WEST. SUJTE 40

J535 COMMA.ND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR

RANDOLPH  AFB. TX 78150-4742	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 NUl\-IBER

FD-2005-00120	

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:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

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

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Article 1Ss, two Letters of Reprimand, and one Memorandum for  Record  for miscond uct. The misconduct included failure to pay government travel card, financial  irresponsibility, driving  with  a  suspended  license,  missed  appointment,  failed  to pay  automobile  loan  in  the  amount  of
$1650.00, uttered 22 checks totaling more than $700.00 and failed to maintain sufficient funds in this bank account. The board was also aware that the applicant was also diagnosed with an impulse control disorder­ gambling. The applicant was found to be mentally responsible for his behavior by the mental health physicians at Lajes Field. The DRB opined  that  through  these  administrative  actions,  the  applicant  had ampl e opportunities to change his negative behavior. 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.

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