AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

, NAIE OF SERVICE ME:l-IBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
AMN	lffUI[ .
X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGA:-OIZATION OF COU:'llSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x

ISSUES

A94.11 A92.15 A92.21

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

x
x
x

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

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE

CASE J'l."UMBER

28 Jul 2004

FD-2004-00134

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.

--------    -.C::

J_ -_,,___ _/l._._ - ------ - ------ - ------ - ------ - ------ - '.

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78I50-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
153.5 COMMAND DR, EE \\'ING. JRD FLOOR
ANDRE\.\'S AFB, MD 20762-7002

A FHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be used

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIE\V BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE :'ol Ul\'JBER

FD-2004-00134	

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 infers the discharge was inequitable and  too harsh because it was based only on off-duty incidents.  The records indicated the applicant received two Articles 15, a vacation of suspended punishment, and had an Unfavorable Information File for misconduct, consisting of multiple instances of failing to pay
his creditors and for failure to go.  In each instance member replied to the disciplinary action with an apology, admitting he had no excuse for his actions.  He was also sent to the Personal Financial Management Program.  The DRB noted that failure to pay just debts is a criminal offense, and opined that through the unit's 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 and the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate.

Issue 2.  Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service, and noted his supervisors often commended him for his work. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance report and other accomplishments, but found the seriousness of applicant's misconduct offset any positive aspects of his duty performance.   The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3. Applicant felt his discharge was unfair because he was told the unit first sergeant was making an example of him. The Board could find no evidence of this contention in the records review and finds this issue without merit.

Issue 4.  The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.  Because applicant did not receive an Honorable discharge, he cannot receive 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.

Issues 5 and 6 apply to the applicant's post-service activities.  Applicant infers that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when young.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant is doing well, has been better managing his finances and paying off his debts, and is going to college.
However, this does not constitute an inequity or impropriety in his discharge.  The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct appropriately characterized his term of service.	

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