AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME 01•' SERVICE MEMBER {LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
·' ---------------------- ·'

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN
·' ---------------'
'................'.

TVP; GEN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION Ot' COUNSEL

x

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTl lER

DENY

X*+

X*+ X*+
X*+

ISSUES

A95.00 AOI.00

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLTCA TION FOR REVIEW OF DJSCHARGE
3	LETTER or NOTil'ICA TION
4		BRJEI' OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITI   NAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARA NCE

X*+

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

03 May 2007	FD-2007-00026

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 appl ication to the A FBCMR

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

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenlistment Code

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,,/.]_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,		-1

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RA NDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50A742

SECRETAR\' OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEi. COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISClfARGf: REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, f:t; WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS 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 NUMBER

FD-2007-00026	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason for discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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, change ofreason for discharge, and change ofreenlistment code are 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. The applicant has expressed a desire for upgrade of his discharge to allow for reenlistment into the armed forces.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s, two Letters of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling for misconduct.  The applicant received his first Article 15 for failure to pay a debt to Lake Hill Motors.  He was disciplined with a suspended forfeiture of pay for two months and restriction to the limits of Little Rock AFB for seven days.  His second Article 15 was for failure to go to his appointed place of duty, failure to maintain cleanliness standards in his dormitory room, and for possession of alcohol in his dormitory room while under the age of 21.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Airman Basic (reduction below Airman was suspended).  The applicant had additional misconduct and was administratively disciplined for a failed dorm room inspection, having alcohol in his dorm room while under the age of 21, dereliction of duty, being disrespectful towards an NCO, and failure to go.  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 20, 2002) 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