AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

•GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

X  RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

x

MEMBERS SITTING
x x x x x

ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER
A94.53, A92.37	A67.10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
2	
HEARING  DATE
10 JUL 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-00039

4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXIIlBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

Case beard 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/MIBR
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, 3RD 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

FD200J..00039	

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 six Records and Letters of Individual Counseling, seven Letters of Reprimand, and an Unfavorable Information file. Member also had one Enlisted Performance Report rated an overall referral '•2." In a 19-month period, his misconduct included being late for work or missing appointments at least eleven times, sleeping on duty, speeding on base, and failure to report and remain at the scene of a motor vehicle accident in which he caused property damage. At the time of the discharge, after consulting counsel, member submitted a statement requesting retention, or in the alternative, a fully honorable discharge. The Board noted that member was age 19 to 21 when his offenses occurred, the same age as other airmen who adhere to expected standards. He was counseled repeatedly in an effort to help him correct his deficiencies. In spite of those rehabilitative efforts, he was unable or unwilling to conform his behavior to that expected of him. The Board concluded he was mature, he 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 September 13, 1996) 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 fmdings 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