AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

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

X	RECORD  REVIE

AFSN/SSAN

YES	No
x

A!l!lRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

x x x x
x

ISSUES

A92. 15 A95.00 A92.21 AOl.00

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLJCATION FOR REVIEW OP DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 l:lJHEF OF PERSONNEL PILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHil31TS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  Al'l'EARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE

!  29 Apr 2010
:   \''APPLIC

CAS!;; NUMBf,R

FD-2009-00025

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 AFBCMR.

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

SAf/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFH, TX 781 50-4742

SECIU:TARY OF TllE AIR t"ORCR PERSONNEi, COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW l!OAR!l
1535 COMMAl\'D DR,  :E WING, 3RD t"l.OOR ANDREWS AFB, Mll 20762-iOOl

AFHQ FORM 0-20771 JAN 00	(EF-V2)

Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE  NUMBER

FD-2009-00025	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before t he Discharge  Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

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	record  nor that  provided  by  the  applicant  substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Issue I . Applicant submitted no issues regarding the  inequity  or impropriety  of his/her  discharge.  The record indicates the applicant received two Article 15s, four Letters of Reprimand, a Letter of Counseling and a Record of Individual Counseling. His misconduct included failure to report (3x), dereliction in the performance of his duty, writing bad checks, failure to obey, failure to properly use his government travel card, purchasing/delivering  alcoholic	to person under the age of 21, failure to go, and making a false official statement. The Board opined that through these administrative actions, the appl icant had ample opportunities to change his behavior. They found the seriousness of the willful  misconduct  offset  any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

Issue	Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters	recommendation and other accomplishments.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job.  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 appropriately characterized his term of service.

Issue 4.  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 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 proced ural 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	no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.	

Attachment: Examiner's Brief