PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	
X  RECORD REVIEW	
	NAME OF (.'OUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

AFSN/SSAN

'SIRl•m

MEMBERS SITTING
x x x x x
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER

A94.53, A92.37

HEARING DATE
25 JUN 03

A67.10

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0542

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 SllBMJTTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3rm FLOOR
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 NUMBER

FD2002-0542	

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

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions.  He had two Articles 15, four Records of Individual Counseling, two traffic tickets, a Letter of Reprimand, an Unfavorable Information File, and one Enlisted Performance Report that was a referral rated overall "3." His misconduct occurred over a 3 and a half year period and included underage drinking, assaulting another airman, traffic violations, and consistently breaking curfew while at Airman Leadership School. At the time of the discharge, member waived his right to consult counsel but did submit a statement in his own behalf, according to the Jegal review. Applicant now points out his satisfactory duty performance and desire to receive his G.I. Bill education benefits. The Board noted that member was age 20 to 23 when his offenses occurred, the same age as other airmen who adhere to standards. He was counseled repeatedly in an effort to help him correct his deficiencies. In spite of those rehabilitative efforts, he was unwilling or unable to improve his behavior. This was particularly evident when he was released from Airman Leadership School for cause after he said he wasn't wiHing to put forth the effort to finish the course and abide by the school policies and standards. The Board concluded applicant knew right from wrong and was responsible for his actions, and therefore was held accountable for them. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

Applicant cited his desire to receive his G.I. Bill education benefits as justification for an upgrade. The Board noted that applicant signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on May 5, 1997) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. While the Board was sympathetic to the impact of the loss of these benefits on applicant, this is not a matter of equity or propriety that warrants 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