-·	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

.	1111 llil1nil•

NAJ\1E OF SERVICE l\1EMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
...
AlC
TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
.•.   COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS  AND OR ORGANIZ TION  OF COUNSEL YES	No
x

·.

.. .. .· >  YOTJt OF TH _BOARD	···:'	··.-  J
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
---------------------------------	x

J

x
x
-.
x
x
--------------------------------
ISSUES	A92.01	INDEX NUMBER	A49.00	·;··.·	· '.EBffS SUBMITIEDTO'.f;f!E :BOAi;i. .•   1:1.:>
A94.05	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 SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

21 May 2004	FD-2004-00095
APPLICANTS ISSUE AND TIIE 8QARD'S.07as10NAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON nm ATIACHED AIR FORC_EDISCHARGE REVJEW BOARD DECISIONAL_RATIONALE	.·
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

.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------	-----------------·.

..

...

.
....

...

...

.··-·> .. :·	,   ;. '    .	.   "'	'".     ,.	.		. 	

.
co· o'\(•  <	·INDORSEMENT:<>>	.··· f>	DATE:   5/21f200f	\)'>',

TO:	FROM:
SAF/M RBR	SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL  COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR

RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 78150-4742	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

FD-2004-00095	

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 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 the  applicant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received four Records of Individual Counseling and one verbal counseling.  His misconduct
included being late for work, traffic violation, unsatisfactory dress and appearance and unsatisfactory performance. The applicant also failed his end of course examination twice.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the misconduct 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 ORB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports. The applicant had three referral reports, each with on overall marking of "2". All reports indicated that the member did not meet minimum training requirements, displayed poor attitude, lacked initiative, failed to meet dress and appearance standards and required constant supervision.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons that were the basis for this case.

Issue 3.  The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.   The Board noted that to receive the G.L Bill, the applicant must have received an Honorable discharge.  The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the appl icant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety that 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