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

·' ----------------------------------, '

AMN	·'   --------------'

:..................................	''	''
TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL YES	No
x

r-.

.    .

>----

VOTE   OF  THE  BOARD	I
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
---------------------------------------	x
x x x
x

!-<IS-S-U-E-S------------------------- -I-N-D-E-X--N-U-M-BER
A95.00

A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD

AOl.00	1	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
ADDITIONAL  EXH I BITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

3 May 2006	FD-2005-00360
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard at Wash ington, D.C.

Advise appl icant 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 appl icant's request.

1<.i	rn  t:9ru>.Jlt._ _ _ _a _ _ _ .Z2._ _ _ _ .1._ _ _ _ .,:._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J   y;f1	-0           .!e.           -4        K--          _.,,__________________
------------------	ORSEMENT	----------------------------------·- ox-tt:·s191zo06·-
TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SU ITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, 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

FD-2005-00360	

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.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 and a Vacation, for failures to go.  He received three Letters of Reprimand for failure to go, failure to pass room inspection and a conviction by  civil court for driving under the influence.  The applicant also received a Letter of Counseling for failing to obey a lawful order in which he was directed to get a hair cut and had been counseled on two previous occasions concerning his dress and appearance.  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.  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 February 13, 2002) 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.

Issue 3.  The applicant stated he was led to believe his discharge would automatically be upgraded in six months.  While a discharge may be upgraded after six months, the upgrade is by no means automatic.  A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the DRB can establish an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  In this case, none was found, so the Board denied the appeal.

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