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

r'·----------------------- .'	AMN

-' ---------------'

·

'' - --------------------- ''

''	''

TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
i.,'::.<:<;pul'!li.,,\,;; NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

:95MPllE BOARD	···...
llON	GEN	UOTHC	OTl lER	DEN Y

'

'

''	x
...:

''

''	x
:
''

'

'	x
.:
'
''	x
':
'
'''	x

1<,;f

-----------------------------------
ISSUES	A94,05	INDEX NUMBER	A49.00	··'tR EXHIBITS SUBMITTED	THE BOA.RO
1	ORDER APPOINT!NG THE BOARD
2	APPUCA TION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	HRIEF OF PERSONNEL f!LE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBM ITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONA L APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

10 May 2007	FD-2006-00449
Al'PLIC41$I'S ISSUl!AND 'tHll(liOAlll>'S Dt!9J$ft)NiljtR.A'tlONAL  AIUUllSClJSSED  ON TIIE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DIS,¢tf$!\<j :MVlllW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONAJ.,E
, ,	.	»'>< ,.,	,· . '.·;,;,o     <   '
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 appl icant's request.

--• ;------------------------------------------------------   · -----------------------------------------------------    '
'	''

'

1'	''
........ ----	--------1./:" "il!Ooui i- - - - -- - -- --- ----....--·,;" ,: - - - -- - - ------------ ":DNfi:" S/lS/2007

''
» ,/ ;·

o_,_';

''
,.,.,J,.,_4/< «	<   '.

To,	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF TllE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCflARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 781 50-4742	ANDREWS At"B, MD 20762- 7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NllMHKR

FD-2006-00449	

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 the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He contends that he was told that he would be receiving an honorable discharge, G.I. Bill benefits, medical and base privileges.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Vacation, a Letter of Reprimand, three Records of Individual Counseling and eight Memorandums for Record for misconduct. He received an Article 15 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  He was punished with a suspended reduction in grade to Airman, restriction to Charleston AFB for 20 days, and 20 days of extra duty.  The Vacation action was for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.   He was reduced in grade to Airman.
The applicant was administratively disciplined for failure to go on several occasions, financial irresponsibility, failure to report to scheduled appointments, disrespect to an NCO, being late for duty on numerous occasions, lying, and failure to comply with cease and desist orders.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the applicant's 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
August  11, 1997) 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