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

:·---------------------    :
' ---------------------- ''

AMN	-' ---------------'

'	'

'	'

TYPE  G EN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

IV , :,C,(!	llL
YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COIJNSEL

''' '

'

'' '
.....:
''

'

''
r-:

''

'
r-:
'''

MEMBER SITTING

IION

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES

A95.00 A93.0l AOl.00

INllf)( NUMBER	A67.l0

EXHIBITS SUBMlTTJ;)·TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

3	LETTER OF NOTlf lCATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSON NEL Fll.F
COUNSFL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
i----1--A.,.,D,,,D"' I"T'"'I"ON'"A'""L'"-E,",X'" H"l"B'"r"i'"'S""S'"U HM ITT ED"' AT TlME OF-- ·-, PERSONAL A PPEARANCE
TAl'E RF.CORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE I IE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

14 Sep 2006	FD-2006-00017
APPLICANT S ISSUE AND ll!E BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHAROE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAi. l\ATIONAl.E

Case heard i n Wash i ngton, D.C.

Ad vise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an appl ication to the AFBCMR

Names and votes wil l  be made available to the applicant at the appl icant's request.

/	-

/
,-8! P2Y:	?!? #..- _ _ _ _ _ fi-.:-::Z.. _ _ _ .Lf._ _ _ /._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1_s	F: ? ? n_E	1:..,.._ ·- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .,
''' ''
INDORSEMENT	DATE:  9/1812006
TOo	FROL

SAf/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

SECRETARY OF nm AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCii.
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANl>RF:ws 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-2006-00017	

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. Applicant realizes his conduct while in the Air Force was not acceptable.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15's, a Vacation, five Letters of Reprimand, and three Letters of Counseling for misconduct.  The first Article 15 was for failure to pay debt to the Military Star Program.  The applicant received a suspended red uction to airman and fourteen days of extra duty.  The Vacation action and second Article 15 were for abuse of his Bank of America government travel card resulting in a red uction in grade to airman and finally to airman basic with 30 days of extra duty.  The applicant also received multiple infractions for financial irresponsibility, failure to go, failure to obey a lawful order from an NCO and disrespect to a commissioned officer and NCO.  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
November 29, 1999) 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.  Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitel y for mistakes he made when young.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 23 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

CONCLUSIONS:   The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was withi n 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