AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRF.SS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER SITIING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x
x x

ISSUES

A94.53 A93.0l

INDl!X NUMBER

A67.SO

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 EXHIBITSSUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANC E HEARING

llEARING l>ATE	CASENUMB£R

03 Oct 2013	FD-2013-00524

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.

TO:

SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY Of 1ll£AIR FORCE Pl!RSONNE   COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCllARGE REVIEW BOARD 15)5COMMAND DR, EEWING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWSAJB. MD 20762-7'01

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00524	

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 and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

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

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

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 Pattern of Misconduct: Discreditable Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities. Applicant wants his discharge upgraded to become eligible for GI Bill benefits. He also admits to making some childish mistakes while in the Air Force. The record indicates the applicant received two Article 15s. His misconduct included DUI, underage consumption (2x), and drunk on duty as Security Forces member. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Although not specifically stated, applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when he was young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 20 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 April 23, 2010) 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