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

...------------------------ ..

AMN

·..-------------...

------------------------ ·	--------------
TYPK   GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OH OHGANI/,ATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION Ot' COLI NSt;L
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOA.RD

MEMBER SITTING

·"""-··	---·
HON	GEN	UOTllC	OTHER	DENY
·...---------------------------------	x
-!...	x
-!...	x
---...:	x
-!..	x
----------------------------------
ISSUES	A95.00	INL>EX NLIMB£H	A67.90	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
AOl.00	I	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	A PPLICATION FOR REVIEW Of DISCHA RGE
3	LETTER OF NOTI PICATION
4	BRIEF Of PERSONNEL FI LE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO Tl IE HOARD
ADDITIONA L EXI llBITS SUBMITTED AT TIM E OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DA TE	CASF: N\JMBER

11 Jan 2007	FD-2006-00155
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RA'f!ONALARE DISCUSSfiO ON THh A'ITACHED AIR FORCE DlSC'HARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard in Washi 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 subm it an appl ication to the A FBCMR

Names and votes will be made available to the appl icant at the appl icant's req uest.

...----------------------·-·····   •··= ·------------------------------------------------------------------     ...

...

...

.- ----- --- --- --- --- - - --- -- --- --- --....-- -'ii-- ----- --- --- --- --- --.- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- -..
I	NDORSEMENT	DATE: t/24/2007
TOo	FROMo
SAF/MRBR	SECRlffARV OF THE AIR  FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOAHL>

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR

RAN DOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NIJMBER

FD-2006-00155	

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 appl icant 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:

Tssue 1. The applicant submitted no issues and realized his actions while in the military were unacceptable and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity i n this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15's, a Vacation, five Letters of Reprimand, three Letters of Counseling, and four Records of Individual Counseling for miscond uct.  .He was administratively disciplined for drug abuse; being late for work; failure to obey a direct order; dereliction of duty; disobeying lawful orders; fai lure to go; abandoned post; sleeping on duty; failure to comply with shaving standards; and failure to meet uniform standards.  J-lis first Article 15 was for striking another
airman in the face four times with a closed fist. He was punished with a suspended reduction to Airman, suspended forfeiture of pay for two months. The Vacation action was for failure to go to appointed place of duty. He was reduced in grade to Airman and forfeited $100.00 pay for two months. His secon Article 15 was for using his Government Travel Card for personal use; and wrongfully accessing unofficial internet sites. For this misconduct, he was reduced in grade to Airman, suspended forfeiture of pay, 30 days extra duty, and a reprimand. 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 mi l itary 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.l. 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  September 11, 2000) 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 requi rements 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 concl udes 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