AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD
fi-:-,--.-·---)-. .-·--H--!--·.-_M-_,--_. -. .-(L-_J\_s-·r.-t_lR_ _S_r_M_l_D_H_I-.E-l_N_l'l_'l_A_L_l	...-_(;_R_.\_U_I·:-----  .....,..-    _,.-..N- --J-\  -------_	11
:	:	AB

••••••••••••••••••  -

•••• • --------------------+	I

-':.-

I--·--···

x

-T :-·""-(i[ == --J 	PERSONAL   APPEARANCE

 	 	I
I	RECOR D  REVIEW	_._,.	·1

2
3
4

C--
+--

<'Ol'NSU.	'- \ME 01- COL'NSEL ANll 011. 011.c;ANli.'ATION

Allllll.ESS AND 011. 01/.(;AMZATION  OF COLNSEL

n:1..	1\o
x
1-c==----=--.:-.---.:·:--::_-__--_ -__--_-_-_-_-_-----M---------T_T_l_N_G_· -----------;1 .  --1.,1.<. )- - -<i-l·: -o--..---.--<. -j-,-"->:-._'R_;_Dn-11·	---,ll :

I
j

x
--------------+-----+------t------+----·-·-·------·    ,,,,,

I

c---------------+------l	1----

1I -
rH
1

I
I

-+------- ·--·--·-------...
x

--

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

---+---

-

-

+----

· -

-+--

-·&•---

;:--, '. ---------------;;;.;-;;;

·-·-"!-----···--
x  	

j----

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-1---

-

-

+---

--t------+----

--··-·---
x

---···

EX.HIHITS SUBMITTED TO TllE BOARi)_ _

A67.50

- ·i
-     I
,	I
_ _	I

I

A93.0I

OIWFR /\l'l'OINTIN( i Tl 11:  Ji();\RD

,_,._,,

/\PPLIC/\TION FOR Rl·V ll w (ff DIS(  1_1,1'«.1-.-----
IJ'Tl'l'.J{  OF N<HIFJ(ArJllN
BRIEF OF PU{SONNEI 1:11.1::

   ,,   ,  	

----------- ---

COUNSH. s RU...L/\SF TO THI• HO/\j{j';------............·--1

ADDITION/\I. FXlllBITS SllBMITTED AT'(fK-·
PERSON/\L APl'E.-\R/\NCI:
-+----------------·-·"--·---

-

I

·--..

T/\1'1: RLCORI>IN(i 01' l'I·RSONAI. Al'l'F/\IV\N( ·1 ·

1

i----·-_,, .....,,,_,,_,,  , 	 +---

. !I F \l(J   L. 11.\ ff
I 15 May 2006

--------

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

+--------------------.···-·-·---·---..

CASE Nl1Ml!Ell.

FD-2005-00394

I Case heard a l Wash ington, D.C
ii .\d v isc appl ica nt of t he decision of t he Board, the right to a personal appea rance wi t h/wit hout counsel, and t he right to
i su bm it a n appl icat ion to the /\ FBCM R
I
I
i Na nll's a nd \ oles wi l l be made available to t he applicant at t he applicant 's request.

I
i

I

i-.,'.:-.;l!-.;·::::>cc_\:,-.:l:j::J;;(7_71..:-;7l7!:._-l;;l_.-l;l::::-<:-!;-;l::L::'·-L;(:-_C "'_  .._."_"_""_=_=_=_ _=_=_=_=_-"'"'<::--_:::_-=_,_.. -_.._.=_:;;_;:_..	-_ __- _-_-_ _T_::::'."_:N:"-<l_;:l}:_::,1:::!:"'"."-;:-;7-8;:_::Q::-A"_;"R:;:-;=r::!:-<;J-c;c::;::: rl+--::&:	---,,,_----:;.,..,C:	1

I	
7	INOORSEMEN'.!li					
l7 ,  DATE:    /30/2006	-!	
I   1 '''	.....------------· --·•..---··"""'--	.	i{( M	,	··	s:, ;; 11.-v OF 111.-..--111.1-··-11-.(.: l' Ro·r;·N1•:1. - -	11.   .. -- ----  - .	
II	
S;\J· MR l\I{	·\IR FOii.CE IJlSl'll.\11.C. E KFVIE\\ llOAll.ll
.'io <    s 1w · 1 · 1w1-:sT. su ITF -io	1;;_1s coMMAM> 1111., t:E w11'<G,,111.11 F1.0011.	I
.  '.	:_1.1_·1_1_J_\ '_'1_._·1·x-_·_m_1:_;0_-_4_74_2_. ---------- -----"-_111_11._-_:"·_s·· A_''u_. _1u__zo 1_1.2-_1_ooz_	,	, _j
AFH Q FORM  0-2077, J AN 00	(EF-Y2)	Previous ed i tion  w ill  he  used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASI<: NUMBER

FD-2005-00394	

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: Applicant recei ved a General discharge for Misconduct and Unsatisfactory Performance - Failure to Progress in OJT

Issue 1. Applicant contends he is trying to pursue his college degree, he paid into the Montgomery GI Bill and should be entitled to it, and he can't afford college on his own and needs financial help.  The DRB noted when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement 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 is having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

Issue 2.  Applicant contends during his military career, he made some bad decisions, he was young and dumb and didn't have a family yet, and he now has a family and purpose, currently works for Social Security, and has a career and wants to continue to grow. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for willfully using his AMEX card while not on official TDY and then making a false official
statement, a Special Court Martial Conviction for writing numerous bad checks, and he twice failed his CDC EOC test. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities  to change his negative behavior.  Although the DRB was pleased to see the applicant was doing well and has a good job, the Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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.

Jn 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