AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING RECORD

•!--	--	----..,.

I N A Mli'. OP    l(QVrr·a....,  l\ii'T.'"'-"nT."n  /T   •  ,,    _

llTIAL)

GRADE

TYPE GEN

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE

AIC
x	RECORD  REVIEW

YES	I	No
I x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEi,

MEMBER SITTING

x

x x x
x
--	--	+-	---'--.,.--,,,,==-±----	""'""=b"""',,,---....,,,,-,,--,-	-1
Iss11Es	A 9S.OO	INDEX NUMBER	A67_ 50	;: <ir !:'EXHIB_ 1j\f4J{ l'fTEl,) "11:	OAJ!
ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TH F BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

IIEAIUNG DATE	CASE NUMJJER

24 Jan 2006	FD-2005-00278
.. Aj>J>1c ·s·11 mrANl1TH1S .oARP;s.R ? i!i!A'l'l<>AL "l'f R': · 1 sE (}t{ Hl'"'T'fAcm;o_ljl:mm:;,l¢llARGE y1

/1.·1·.

1

p,<Jtuoi;c 1.'..?m l\.Anf>NALE .· . I .·· . ". ''i'.•...·.,.\......- 1 ·1·· 1

..•..

Case heard via video-teleconference  between Andrews AFB, MD and St Augustine, FL.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR. Names and votes wil l be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

1F_:.•_1     1

-- ··:·/··,iM.}..i.::R.v..:·R

DORSEMJ!!lifi1!!.;l} iii\'.

'.2

,::_:_·_···S·_. '_•ii·.i.1._·..Al...

8

Ji '''·-

····cc==-'--- -"'---"-

FROM;

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCii, AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW llOARD

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

1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD t'LOOR ANDREWS AFll, 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

FD2005-00278	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) and was scheduled to participate in a video-teleconference, but did not appear at the time specified. Because he did not keep the appointment, his case was considered as a non-personal appearance case.

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.

lSSUE:

Issue.  The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.  The DRB noted that when the appl i cant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement acknowledging that 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.  The DRB examined the basis for discharge and the supporting documents as well as the Arca Defense Counsel's submission on behalf of the applicant, but could find no impropriety or inequity which would justify an upgrade in service characterization.

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 appl icant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief