AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
.-------------------------------- .	SRA	---------------'
""'··-- --- --- --- -'·

TYPE GEN	x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	RECORD  REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANl7,ATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

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

HON	GEN	UOTHC

x

x

OTHER

DENY
x

x
x

ISSUES

A93.23 A92.21 A93.11 A93.0I A93.15

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPUCA TION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIM PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

13 Jun 2007

FD-2006-00115

Case heard in Washington, D.C. via video teleconference with Robins AFB, GA

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an appl ication to the AFBCMR. Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

-c· - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -	- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - rl'1. - - - - - - - - - - - - -.•..
'	:...

-------

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY  OF IBE AIR FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
15J5 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2006-001 15

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) without counsel via video teleconference between Andrews AFB, MD and Robins AFB, GA on  13 June 2007.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #5: Letters of Reference (8)

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 1.  The applicant's principal contention is that he should receive the G.I Bill benefits, citing his pursuit of a college   education, the support he is providing for his four children, his full-time night shift employment, and outstanding citizenship.  The records indicated the applicant received two Articles  15, two Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling, and five Records of Individual Counseling for a pattern of misconduct.  The Board was sympathetic with the likely adverse economic impact that the loss of G.I. Bill benefits has upon the applicant's ability to fund his education and to provide for his family; but detennined that none of these are matters of inequity or impropriety in his case that would warrant an upgrade.

Issue 2.  The DRB considered the contributory effect of the applicant's monthly financial support reportedly provided for treatment of his daughter's asthma on the civilian economy, upon his inability to meet other financial obligations on his limited income.  However, the DRB detennined that the applicant had full access to helpful resources, such as financial management counseling and the Air Force Assistance Fund, as a remedy to his recurring financial irresponsibility.

Issue 3.  The applicant also implicitly contends that he was young and immature at the time he committed his offenses, citing that he has "learned [his] lesson" since his discharge.  The DRB recognized that the applicant was 23 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, the DRB noted that the applicant was within the same age group of the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to Air Force standards of conduct.  The ORB concluded that the applicant's pattern of misconduct is not mitigated by his age or perceived immaturity at the time the offenses were committed.

Issue 4. The applicant contended, during testimony, that he was singled out due to his race, in the processing of at least one of his disciplinary actions; specifically his "reluctance" to carry out a reportedly self-incriminating order from his supervisor.  However, the DRB found no evidence, such as Tnspector General reports or documents from an alternative investigative body, to substantiate an inequity or impropriety occurred due to a racial or cultural bias.

Issue 5. The ORB also acknowledged that the applicant received treatment for depression during calendar year 200 I and again near the time of his discharge in 2002, particularly as it may have impacted his duty performance. However, the DRB found no causal or mitigating relationship between the applicant's depression and the offenses he committed.

Issue 6.  The DRB considered the applicant's "outstanding citizenship" since leaving military service and was pleased to see that  he was doing well as the owner-operator of a retail apparel business, "Bubblegum and Grits."  However, the DRB determined that the applicant's post-service  accomplishments are overshadowed by the numerous infractions that characterize his military service.

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.

I n 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