AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIL>DLE  INITIAL)	GRADE	A FSN/SSA N

·.-----------------------·'

--------------1

'	'	SRA	'	'

'L•••••••••••••••••••••••'•
TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

------------- :

covl1ls11i.: ' " NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANI7.ATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YIOS	No
x

MEMBER  SITTING	-·,,,,,,,,,,,,,,  ,, ,,.,.,,,,,,.,..   ·

VOJE, OF THE BOARD

!ION	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
----------------------------------	x
x x
,
x
,
x
-----------------------------------

ISSll>:S	A95.00 AOI.00

INDEX NUMBER	A67.IO	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING  TH E BOARD
I	2	APPLICATION FOR R EVI EW OF DISC I IA RGE
3	LETTER OF NOTI FICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

05 Jun 2006	FD-2005-00311
' APPJ'IC\'\NT'S ISSUE ANO THI! BOAAO'S Otlt:lSlONAL RA ''':!WAI, AIU! OlSC!,(l!li,l>ll ON THE A1TACHllll AIR FORCE lllsCHARGE REVIEW BOA RO OECISION AL RATIONA 1.F.
,) >	' N ,,(
Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to subm it an application to the AFBCMR

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the appl icant's req uest.

-i;;il,ne.i1>I	_ _ - ii._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .:s:: ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .Wi::&il'tifuif.ru>.t\)lJ).	11,2I1.l'ft ::z2.:z2._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

''

.

'	:....------ - -
''      --·r;·-------------,-------,fr-----------piMi"Nr--------.-------------------------------------ififi:-9iiii   - - - - -     '

-

_,
------

-·

TO,	FROM,

SAFIMRBR

SECR,rARV 0>' TH>; All< t'ORCE P!;RSONNEI, COUNCii.
AIR >'Ol<CE mSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST,  SUITE 40	ISJS COMMAND llR, IOt: WI NG, JRD t'LOOR
RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 781 50-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 10762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

   - 	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00311	

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 appl icant 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: The Board finds that the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge and after thorough review of the record, the board was not able to identify any issues. The records indicated that the applicant received an Article 15, four Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling and three Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct. The misconduct  included  Article  128, Assault; failure to go, dereliction of duty  and late  for duty. The Board opined that through these administrative actions the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected from all military  members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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 8, 2004) 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.

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