,,.•.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

TI 7111PllS

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----------------+-------1----+-----t-----+	1
x
x x x
x
------------------------------------   '

SSUES

A94.53

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

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 APPERANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

06 Jan 2004	FD-2003-00442

Case heard at 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

{

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

SECRETARY OF mE 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

FD2003-00442

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 misconduct, minor disciplinary infractions. He had an Article 15, a vacation of suspended punishment, four Letters of Reprimand, six Records of Individual Counseling, and an Unfavorable Information File. His misconduct included seven incidents of failure to go, recklessly driving a government vehicle resulting in an accident and causing damage to two other parked vehicles, displaying an unacceptable attitude and undisciplined behavior to include insubordination, writing four bad checks and failing to pay the resultant debts, and sleeping on duty. At the time of the discharge, member consulted counsel and submitted a statement in his own behalf requesting an honorable discharge.  Member was age 21 to 23 when his misconduct occurred, and there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong; he was essentially the same age as other airmen who adhere to the expected standards and are discharged honorably without any misconduct. The Board opined that through the unit's numerous administrative actions, member had ample opportunity to correct his negative behavior, but he was either unable or unwilling to do so. After a through review of the records, the Board did not find any mitigation or extenuation to warrant an upgrade, and the records review disclosed no inequity or impropriety.

The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification for upgrade. While the Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant 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