AIR FORCE DISCHA RGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAM E  Of  SER\' ICE  M EMBER  (LAST,  FI RST  MIOHLE  IN ITIAL)	GRADE	A FSN/SSA N

T_,_·rE__G_E_:N_-+··--._-J-,.-.===P=E=R=S=O=N=A=L==A=P=P=E_-A=={A=N=__£_---_-__-        -=--...  -.-,__t-x     J_._R_Eco_R_D_R_E_V_I_"w	,_
1- co_u..N._S_EL_--I NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADLIRESS ANll OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
Y.l:S	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

I JON

VOTE OF THE BOARD
G EN	UOJ J IC	OTl l LR	Dl-:NY
x
x

.,.....-.-- ·	-&-----+-----+------+-------+--
x x x

ISSUFS

A94.05 A93.09

INDEX  NUMBER

A66.00

E;l\:IJIBITS 1.JBMITTED TO THE BOARD
ORDER APPOINTING Tl IE IlOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DlSCHAR(iF
I--+-- ---·-- ---- --·'''·······,. "" ··---·-··--------·-·-
3	l ETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FJLF COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TH E BOARD
ADDITTONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONA!. APPEARANCE
-. - ·-· ----------------!
TAPF R ECOR DI NG OF PERSONAL APPENV\NCE

UfARJNG DATE	CASt: NIJMBICR

08 Dec 2005	FD-2005-00218
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND TKE BOAAJ)'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW I\OAR))'DECISIONAL RAT!ONAJ.F

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Ad vise appl icant of the decision of t he.Boa rd, the right to a personal  appearance with/without  counsel , and the ri ght to submit an appl ication to the AFBCMR

Names and votes will be made availa ble to the applicant at the applicant's req uest.

J

INDORSEMENT

-TO: --·-·-SS.'0-F:C(.MSTRRBFRET WFST, SlJITE 40

. ---	;	' i c	R::.	"::: :::

-Nc·n, ------

rnoM:
·'	· ·	.	1535 COMMANll DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB. TX 781 50-4742	ANDRLWS  Arn. Mll 20762-7002
--·· ----------- .  -	--	,., ""'""'"·· ··-··

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous ed ition will be used

AI R FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD J>ECISIONAI"  RATIONALE	CASE Nt.IMBEff

FD-2005-0021 8	

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 avai lable 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.

ISS UE: Applicant does not contest his d i scharge. lle states that he wants to use the G.I. Bi ll and that he has been passed over for jobs due to his characteri zation of d ischarge. Applicant also states that he was harassed repeatedly by his supervisors after one isolated incident. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for being disrespectful in language and deportment toward a TSgt and a SMSgt, and  for dereliction of duties.  He also received a Vacation action under the UCMJ for wrongfull y using marijuana.  I n addition, he received a Letter of Reprimand for missing an appointment, dereliction of duty and for failing to obey orders. Hardly one isolated incident. The DR8 opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opport u nities to change his negati ve behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all mili tary members. The characteri zati on of the discharge recei ved by the appl icant was found to be appropriate.  The applicant cited his desire to receive the
G.I. Bill benefits as justification for upgrade. The DR B 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 ineq uity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

CONCJ..,USIONS: The Discharge Revi ew 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