AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

A I C

·-------------------------
'
-------------------------!

AFSN/SSAN
1:----------------:
·--------------- ·

TYPE  GEN

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I

RECORD REVIEW

I
YE'.S	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL ANll OR ORGANIZATION

ADllRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION Ot' COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

· .···
HON
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A62.00

I	OR DER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPi .!CAT!ON FOR REVIEW OF DISC! IARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXI llBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

TAPE R ECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEA RANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

08 Mar 2007	FD-2006-00373

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

.... ···-. :.'...

Advise applicant 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 req uest.

-

.

'.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------	''
'
'·
'.	'
;I:::::::) - ------ - -- -- - - - -- ;- ,j j,- - - -- - - - - - - - ··115iis M°E 1 -------·.;----------- :;:.. .,;,..;:,:.:··------------ ,;,;:ii>R ;-;;1t()b'
I rnoM,

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

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR  FORC:E  PERSONNEL  CO\INrIL
AIR  t'ORCf:  lllSrIIARGE   REVIEW  IJOARD 1535 COMMANll  OR, EE WING, JRIJ  FLOOR ANIJREWS 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 NUMBE!t

FD-2006-00373	

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.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received six Letters of Reprimand and one Record of Individual Counseling for misconduct.	The misconduct included consuming alcohol ic beverages as a minor on three separate occasions, failure to follow crew leader instructions, causing damage to government property, dereliction of duty, failure to go, failure to return to duty after completion of a detail, providing a false official statement to an Air Force recruiter. The Board noted that on the Standard Form 86, Question naire for National Security Positions, that the applicant answered NO to the question pertaining to pol ice records and arrests.  The SF 86 shows that even though the applicant marked NO, he went on to list the shoplifting charge and miscellaneous speeding tickets.  The Board also found that the applicant indicated, on the SF 86, that he had used marijuana a total of four times from 1998 to 2000.  However, in an interview conducted November  1, 2000, the applicant stated that from 1997 through January 2000 he had smoked marijuana an average of 1 to 2 times per month. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge recei ved 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 Apri l  12, 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 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