NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSNISSAN

x	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	RECORD  REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORCANll.ATION

ADDllESS AND OR ORC-'NIZATION OFCOUNSEL

-:.	:--·	,Y .PZ"	

!'" -·  ·- ·:- ' ""	' ,· '"'.·: :-· '-, ':' .... - -·:. -= : =..-  '°' ·.

I

I

•	--	,	,,  '	•	"'     .....• '( .'t·-..-....l' -..' _  ..,.,.,. ,,.   ·

I

I

!

I	l	I	I	1	I	\

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

X+*

I	I	!	l	I

I

i

'i	I	t

l
t	!	I	l

+*	x

I	l	.
I	I	I	'	I	l

'l	I	I	i.

I	!	s'

X+*

l	.

I	i	I	I	i!

I	l	i	!
!'	I	l

X+*

I

I	i	!
l

l	'I

!	!	i

I

!	I	!
I	I	j	I	l

X+*

l	!
'f	I	I	i	!	i

v.l	'

J.t.:>. I	!
A93.33 A93.07

l.,.10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LEITER 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 APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DAT&

01Aug 2013

CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00328

Case heard in 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.

* CHANGE RE CODE
+ rHA NGF RF,ASO)J AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL	l

I	I

I	l	i	1'
I

f	1'
1

.I  . I  .

I	I	I

I

I

J	'	!	l .	l
I

TOi	FROMi
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742

SECll£TARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISOIARCE REVIEW BOARD
!SJ!COMMAND DR. EE WINC, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS At"B.MDlG762-7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077,JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00328	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge  Review Board  (DRB), without  counsel, at Andrews AFB on 01 Aug 2013.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #5: Applicant's Contentions

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING: Upgrade of the discharge, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are 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: The applicant was discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for minor disciplinary infractions. The applicant contends he takes full responsibility for his misconduct; however, he feels he still deserves his GI Bill benefits. The record indicates the applicant received two Article 15s, a Letter of Reprimand, and a Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included: sleeping on duty; failure to follow security forces procedures for addressing parking violations; failed patrolman standard evaluation and indicated to a Non-Commissioned Officer that he intentionally failed test; and disrespectful in language to two Non-Commissioned Officers. The applicant testified that upon his arrival at Bellows AFB, HI, he became aware of his mother's illness (breast cancer) and wanted to return home to be close to his mother during this difficult time in her life. However, due to manning requirements and mission critical training he was denied leave. He also testified that due to denial of his leave to visit his mother he became disgruntled and thought his chain of command was out to get him like at his last base. Also during his time at Bellows AFB, the applicant became angry and argumentative towards his superiors and flight chiefs on several different occasions, which resulted in the applicant having his weapon removed twice and being command directed for a mental health evaluation. The Board opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior. The Board found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

Although not specifically stated, the applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when he was young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 26 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification for upgrade. The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on May 30, 2008) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.	

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief