Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00587
Original file (FD-2008-00587.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

 

 

 

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (1.AST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
—— AB po
TYPE GEN | [ PERSONAL APPEARANCE _ X | RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND: OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

 

 

 

 

 

HON GEN UOTHC “OTHER DENY

 

MEMBER SITTING

 

x

 

 

 

x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    
 

—--—— ct mn
ia

A93.01 INDEXNUMBER = AB TSO Si aun
A94.05 1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD Oe te

2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ~

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER

ISSUES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

27 Apr 2010 FD-2008-00587

APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON

       

i ATTACHED AINT ONCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

 

 

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 applicant at the applicant’s request.

 

+O: FROM:

SAF/MRBR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR

RANDOLPH AFB, 1X 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

 

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD-2008-00587

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

The applicant was scheduled for a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board at Andrews Air
Force Base, Maryland on 27 April 2010, but failed to appear or notify the board and therefore, he forfeited
his right for a personal appearance.

The attached brief contains the 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. The applicant was discharged IAW AFI
36-3208, paragraph 5.50.1: A Pattern of Misconduct, Discreditable Involvement with Military Authorities
with an under honorable conditions (general) service characterization. The applicant was convicted of the
following offenses at a Special Court-Martial on 29 April 1995: Two specifications of larceny of items
totaling about $3,600, under Article 121, UCMJ and one specification of willfully allowing Mr. S to use his
military identification card (18 USC, Section 499), in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. The applicant was
sentence to 30 days confinement, reduction to E-1 and 90 days hard labor without confinement. The
applicant also received two Records of Individual Counseling, one Letter of Counseling and two Letters of
Reprimand during his enlistment.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. Applicant contends that he would like to start receiving education benefits. The applicant’s
implication is 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, dated 28 November
2003) 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. Furthermore, the G.I. bill is not
afforded unless a member has served for at least 36 months.

Issue 2. Applicant contends and that because he was 17 years old at the time he came into the Air Force, he
had “a lot of growing to do;” thus, making irresponsible choices that resulted in his discharge. The DRB
recognized the applicant was 20 years old when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he
did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was no different than the vast majority of
first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force standards of conduct. The DRB concluded that the
characterization of the applicant’s discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

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 determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment:

Examiner's Brief’

Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00281

    Original file (FD2008-00281.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is denied. 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. The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I.

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00064

    Original file (FD-2009-00064.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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. Applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00133

    Original file (FD-2009-00133.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW >) COUNSEL °.."''| NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL HON GEN “UO” THC OTHER X Xx x x x ISSUES A94 00 UNG A UVEEE A67 10 d ae a EXHIBITS SUBMITT ED TO THE THE BOARD ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00596

    Original file (FD-2008-00596.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

  • AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2007-00424_Redacted

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN a AMN pe TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING UOTHC OTHER DENY ISSUES A93.01 INDEX NUMBER A67.00 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME...

  • AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00234

    Original file (FD2008-00234.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY x x xX x xX ISSUES A94,53 INDEX NUMBER A49.00 s 1 [ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00530

    Original file (FD-2008-00530.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL VOTEOR-TIEE- BOARD HON GEN UOTHC / OTHER DENY x Xx x Xx L _| x | Issues SaaS NUMER rr = : “ED TO THE ISSUES A94.53 INDEX NUM A67.00 EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THI BOARD 1 JORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE...

  • AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00465

    Original file (FD-2013-00465.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIRFORCEDISCHARGE REVIEWBOARDHEARINGRECORDNAMEOFSERVICEMEMBER(LAST,FIRSTMIDDLE INITIAL)GRADEAFSN/SSANTYPE GEN x I PERSONALAPPEARANCEI RECORD REVIEW fJ!. :k::: NAMEOFCOUNSELANDORORGANIZATION YES NoxADDRESSANDORORGANIZATIONOFCOUNSEL:_ .MEMBERSITTINGHON GENUOTHC OTHER DENY X*+ I I I IX*+ISSUES A94.05 INDEXNUMBER A67.10 1ORDERAPPOINTINGTHEBOARD2 APPLICATIONFORREVIEWOFDISCHARGE3 LETTEROFNOTIFICATION4...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00092

    Original file (FD-2009-00092.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ” VOTE OF THE BOARD a HON GEN UOTHC OTHER [ DENY xX x x x x ISSUES 4.94.95 INDEX NUMBER A67.10 BS Oo CEXETBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD oe LI JORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD __ _ 2 [APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3_ [LETTER OF NOTIFICATION _ 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 24 Jun 2010 FD-2009-00092 APPL! FINDING: The Board denies the...

  • AF | DRB | CY2015 | FD-2015-00235

    Original file (FD-2015-00235.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    GENERAL:Theapplicantappealsforupgradeofdischarge toHonorable. Theapplicantwasoffereda personalappearancebeforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclined andrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbased ontheavailableservicerecord.Theattached briefcontainsavailablepertinentdataontheapplicantandthefactors leadingtothedischarge. FINDING:TheBoarddeniestheupgradeofthedischarge.ISSUE:The applicantreceiveda GeneraldischargeforMisconduct-DrugAbuse