•	I	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD
•	

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE

x	I	RECORD     REVIE-W     --·

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
TYPE GEN

GRADE
AMN

AFSN/SSAN

rol ""'''"' ;,;, NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A66.00

x x x
x

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

01 Jul 2004	FD-2004-00147

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

1I                --:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------	·.    r------	J
:	:

'

'	''
I                                --------------------------------------------------------------,    ---------------------------------------------
fro.	"	OR$MENT	FROM:	SECRETA:Y OF THE AIR FORCE PE: :L ::
SAF/MRBR	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD 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-2004-0014 7	

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.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for wrongfully using marijuana, two Letters of Reprimand, and four Letters of Counseling for various misconduct. 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. Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case. 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.

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