-- ---- - -- -

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

AlC
x	RECORD REVIEW

S I U•

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

-- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - -·--------------+-----+-----4-----t------j ---
x
x
x
x
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J	x

ISSUES	A92.2J

INDEX NUMBER	A67.10

A93.10	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

HEARll\G  DATE	CASE NUMBER

16 Sep 2004	FD-2004-00207

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.

·..----------------------------------	---------------12 ----------------------------------------------------------   ..
•	!----------1

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

SECRETARY OF THE Am FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIE\V BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00207	
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.

Issue 1. Applicant infers that he should not be penalized indefinitely for the mistakes he made when young. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, vacation of suspended punishment, and two Letters of Reprimand for misconduct.  His
infractions included dormitory violations, parking on the grass, failure to go, and two incidents of dereliction of duty.  Applicant notes he was immature at the time, used his discharge as motivation to become a better person, and has grown in many ways.  The DRB opined that through the administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunity to change his negative behavior but didn 't.  The DRB also recognized the applicant was 21 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he did not know right from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was the same age as the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to Air Force's standards of conduct.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

Issue 2 applies to the applicant's post-service activities.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well, has a good job, and is pursuing further education.  However, is not a basis of inequity or impropriety which warrants an upgrade, and none was suggested or found in the course of the record review. The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

Issue 3.  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 (DD Form 2366, on August 5, 1991) 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.	

If he can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board.  If he chooses to exercise this right to a personal appearance hearing, applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.

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.

Inview 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