NA ME OF SF:RVICF: MEMBER {LA.Sr, FIRST )\:ifoou: I N ITIAL)		..
AIR FORCE DISCH ARGE REVIEW BOARD H.EARJNG RECORD

X   RECORD REVIEW

---------

·--··  -----i-A7'0=011i,;s·:s'""A"' No==oR=o=•R"G"""A"N""1'z..-A:"T"'"J'"O''"N'" O"F',.(,:,o'"u"N''"·"s·i',;-;-  ----····----

 	
VOTE OF THE BOARD

!ION

Gl':N	IJOTJK

OTHEll

l>l£1W
x x x x x

ISSUES
A92.01; A92.03; A92.05; A92.21 ;A94.0l;A94.05; A.92.35

.•liiAR.ING DATE
6 FEB 03

CAS£ NIJMflF.R
FD2002-0401

•:xu BITS SIJBMITIED TO THE l!OARD
1-- - 0R_D_E_R_A. PPOINTING THE BOARD

2	APPLICATION f'OR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

i    3
4

. ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUl:lMI rrt:o AT  TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL Af'PERANCE II EAR ING

REMARKS
Case heard at Travis AFB, California.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right t.o a personal appearance and to subm it an application to the AFRCMR.

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFl3. TX 78150-4741

-AFHQ FOR'10-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2f

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARO
1 535 COMMAND DR, EE WING. 3ttn FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762·7002
Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIE\V BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE Nt:'.VIBER

FD2002-0401	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of d ischarge 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 to Honorable is denied.
The Board  finds that  neither  the  evidence  of record  or that  provided  by  the applicant  substantiates  an impropriety that would justify upgrade of the discharge.

The applicant's issues are listed in the attached brief.

ISSUE t. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and that it was based on one isolated incident in 25 months of service. The records ind icated the applicant received an Article 15, a Letter of Reprimand,  and two Letters of Counseling for disobeying a lawful order (twice) by refusing to take the Anthrax immuni zation shot, failure in the weight management program, and failure to go (three times) to his unit mobility section with required documentation. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had amp1c opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the miscond uct 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.

ISSUE 2. Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty perfonnance as documented by his perfonnancc reports, letters of recommendation  and other accomplishments.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty perfonnancc.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

ISSUE 3 applies to the applicant's post-service activities.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well.  However, no inequ ity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term  of service.

ISSUE 4.  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 J 2 Dec 97) 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.

The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge. The DRB concluded  that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.	
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.

Cont'd	FD2002-0401

I n view of the foregoing findings the board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for u pgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief