AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE l\1EMBER (LAST, FIRST l\'IIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSl'i/SSAN

YES

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

AMN
x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATIO!\ OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES	A93.0J A94.05

INDEX WMBER

A67.HJ

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LE'ITER 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

HEAG DATE	CASE NUMBER

12 Aug 2005	FD-2005-00117

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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78I 50-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY OF TilE AIR FORCE PERSOl\1\"EL COU!\CIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMANb DR, EE WING, JRD FWOR
ANDRE\VS 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-2005-00117	

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 I. The records indicated the applicant received two Article l 5s, five Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling, and three Records oflndividual Counseling.  The misconduct included license revoked for reckless driving in a government vehicle, speeding while driving a government vehicle, late for duty, failure to go, misusing government credit card, and assault.  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.

Issue 2 applies to the applicant's post-service activities.  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.

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 22, 1995) 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