AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SJ;;RVICE MEM.BER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AB
RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

00

x x x

A92.21
A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A66.00

1  ORDER APPOTNTING THE BOARD
2   APPLICATION  FOR  REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

4  BRlEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMIITED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASI': NUMBER

02 Feb 2010	FD-2008-00465

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

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

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

SECRETARY  OF nlE AIR  FORCt: PERSONNEL  COUNCIL A.TR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW l!QARD
1.535 COMMAND DR, ER WING, 3RD  'LOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00465	

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

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB),without  counsel,  at Andrews AFB on 02 Feb 2010.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.
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:

Issue 1. Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article  15, a Letter of Reprimand, and two Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct. His misconduct consisted of wrongful use of marijuana, striking another airman, failure to check BITC truck and driving on a flat tire, and missing appointments. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to  change  his negative behavior. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job as a dental assistant.  However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropri ately characterized his term of service.

Issue 3.  The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on June 4, 1999) 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.

CONCLUSION: 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 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 and detem1ines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief