TYPE GEN

AIR  FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD	I

- - --- -- - -- '1TIAL)	GRADE
AB
I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD   REVIEW

1----c.o..."l-JlN..s...E...L_-i  NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF. THE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	I	DENY

ISSUES

A93.01

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

XlllBl'i'.$ SUBMl'fl'EIJ TO THE BOARD
l	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

27 Jan 2006	FD-2004-00144

Case heard at Washington, D.C., without the applicant's presence.  He did not appear for a scheduled personal appearance. Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.
Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the appl icant's request.

I   - 	

TO:

<()RSEMiL..
---"-----"'	"--"-'""--"----------'-"""' --"-	--==""'""'"	-- '·""""'---
FROM:

DA/f E: 11271200()

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD 153S 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

FD-2004-00144	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) and scheduled a personal appearance via video teleconference, but failed to appear.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: None

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.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. 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 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.

Issue 2.  Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 22 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was older  than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct, and also noted he was enlisted in the AF Reserves for 2 years prior to serving on active duty.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

Issue 3.  The applicant stated he was told his discharge could be upgraded in six months.  The DRB noted the issue was common, the result of miscommunication.   While a discharge may be upgraded after six months, the upgrade is by no means automatic.  A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the DRB
can establish an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  In this case, none was found, so the Board denied the appeal.

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