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

;--------------------- '
'

AB	'-----------------'

1-=--:-:.-.:-:..-o-"-"--=-=--'----=---T--'-=--'--=-----';Jr"--"-''------------------------l-- ---------l--:. ••••••••••••••• ---------J

TYPE GEN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW

YES	No
x

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

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x x

SSUES

A93,01

INDEX NUMBER

A67.l0

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER or NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF or PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO Tl IE BOARD
ADD!Tl   NAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING  Of  PERSONAL APPEARANCE  I IE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

22 Sep 2006	FD-2006-00074

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 submit an application to the A FBCMR

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

. l!'l"'J!'!l-.P..F.1!,.F,,!;l.!.ll.1!.E.R. ••• •A .i. •••
'

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR   ·ORCE PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDRF.WS AFB, MD 20762-7002

Al<'HQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-0007 4	

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. Although not explicitly stated, the applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when young.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 22 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. The records indicated the applicant received two Article  15's, a Vacation, and a Letter of Reprimand for misconduct.  He was disciplined with a Letter of Reprimand for financial irresponsibility.  The first Article 15 was for making a false official statement concerning payments on his American Express government travel card.  He was punished with a suspended reduction to airman and a reprimand.  The Vacation action was for failure to pay his debt to American Express.  His second Article 15 was for failure to go.  He was reduced in grade to airman basic.  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.

Issue 2.  The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.  The ORB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on  September 3, 1992) 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.

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