AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

TYPE  GEN	x	I

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

I	RECORD  REVIEW

fJ!.	: k ::: NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

:_     .

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

I

I

I

l

I

J	X*+
i
i	I	I

I	!

I

'I	!	I

I

i
I
I

X*+

X*+

I

!	I	I	i

I	I	l

l	I	I	I

I

I

X*+

I	I	I	I

X*+

ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10

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 APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

30 Jan 2014	FD-2013-00465

	··. . · '.

Case heard in via video teleconference between Joint Base Andrews Maryland and Robins AFB Georgia Advise applicant of the decision of the Board 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

*Narrative Reason and Authority
+RE Code

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

FROM:

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00465	

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, via video teleconference between Joint Base Andrews Maryland and Robins AFB Georgia on 30 Jan 2014.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #5: Applicant's Contentions
Exhibit #6: Character reference letters

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

FINDING:   The request for the upgrade of the discharge, to change the reason and authority for discharge, and to change the reenlistment code is denied.

ISSUE:  Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He stated his misconduct was due to lack of communication and conflicting orders from his leadership.  The records indicated the applicant received one Article 15, one Vacation, three Letters of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling.  His misconduct included failed to obey a lawful order (2x), failed to go to an appointment on time, used Government Travel Card for personal purposes, failed to go to duty on time (2x), and failed to go to physical training on time.  After a complete and thorough review of the records, the evidence submitted by the applicant and consideration of the applicant's testimony, the DRB opined that through these administrative actions the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. Additionally, the board felt that with the applicant's five years and 11 months of service, he was well aware of how to engage his chain of command when miscommunication or conflict occurred.   The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career.  The discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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 March, 7 2007) 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 and 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