AIR FORCE  DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING RECORD
-  NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

YES	No
x

A JC
PERSONAL APPEARA NCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW
NAME OF COU1"'"SEL Al'iD OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZ.A TION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67.JO

x
x x x

I	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
3	
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

12 Oct 2004	FD-2004-00257

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

.....................          -................................................................................................................................................................	-   --------

-----	····----- ·	···r ·······!

TO:	FROM:
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
1535 COMMAND DR, EE 'WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS ..\FB, MD 20761-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition wil1 be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00257	

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. Applicant states that his age and immaturity led him to make poor decisions. He also states that he has been working as a Paramedic and would like to receive his VA benefits. The records indicated the applicant received five Letters of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling for various acts of 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. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job. However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing. The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.  The applicant cited his desire to receive the
G.J. Bill benefits as justification for upgrade. The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366) 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. Ifhe should choose to exercise his right to a personal appearance hearing, the 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.

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