AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OJ' SERVICE MEMBER (LA&I, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	G RADE	AFSN/SSAN

AMN
X	RECORD  REVIEW

ADDRESS ANP OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

A94.53	INDEX NUMllER	A67.10

x
x

1 ' ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD

COUNSEL'S RN.EASE TO THE BOARD
·	ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
•	PERSONAL APPEARANCE
R ECORDING OF PERSONAL A PPEARANCE HEARING

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

FROM•

SECRETARY OF TllE Am;·oacE PERSONNf'.L COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW ROARD
!535 COMMAND  llR, F:E WING, JRU FLOOR ANl>REWS AFB, Mil 20762-ill-Ol

AFHQ F0'\1 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE  Nt:MBER

FD-2009-00134	

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

ISSUE:

Applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge.  The applicant does submit his desire to receive the G.L Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.  The record indicates the applicant received two Article l 5s, three Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling and three Records oflndividual Counseling.  ITis misconduct included failure to maintain dorm room (2x), failure to pay attention in class, using provoking words to another airman, failure to have required uniform items, failure to complete 30-day inspection, being delinquent on credit card account, making a false official statement and failure to follow assigned duties.  The DR B noted that when the applicant applied for the MGIB benefits that he understood he must receive an I Ionorable discharge to receive foture 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.  The Board opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opport unities 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.

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 foll 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 determines the discharge should remain unchanged .

Attachment: Examiner's Brief