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 BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING
Lely ye
HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER
04 Aug 2010 FD-2009-00133
Ps ee ISSUE-AND THE BONDS ee RATIONAL E ARE ‘DISCUSS!
En eT Mecae Al AIR FORCE DISCHARGI
eee fale Sa
RO DECISIONAL RATIONALE, | &:
on ae ee = -
ase heard i 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 wil] be made available to the applicant at the applicant’s request.
¥
A z qarenocivicNT .
[ FROM:
TO:
SAF/MRBR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
. - AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
$50 C STREET WESTY SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 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-2009-00133
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 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. Applicant contends the action taken with regard to his discharge was unjust and of questionable
legality because as a result he was required to forfeit his education benefits which he had contributed to
during the period of his enlistment. The applicant cited his desire for his G.I. Bill benefits to be reinstated as
justification for upgrade. The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a
statement (DD Form 2366) 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 determines the discharge should remain unchanged
Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00530
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 | CY2010 | FD-2009-00152
2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO TILE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 14 Jul 2010 FD-2009-00152 ‘ABELICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARDS DECISIONAL: RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED ATR FORCE DING ree ee SS ae Biel nos LARGE BEVIEW-BOARG DECISION! The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00078
*Reason and Authority +Reenlistment Code EUR SOT a f s NE TO: FROM: ; SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL Ban EES AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD §50 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR RANDOLPH AFB, TX 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-2009-00078 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00203
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) PERSONAL APPEARANCE NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION TYPE GEN AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD GRADE SRA AFSN/SSAN x RECORD REVIEW ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY X X Xx X X ISSUES A94.05 INDEX NUMBER A67.10 ee A I ae 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...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00093
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIMF OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 01 Jul 2010 FD-2009-00093 CC OAPPLICANT’SASSUB AND. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00156
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND GR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL VOTE OF THE:BOARD MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY xX x x x SS ws 7 jl — ms mm Tr a 5 ms ae Tn ISSUES A93.19 INDEX NUMBER AG67.10 EXHIBITS SU MIL EES A93.23 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THEBOARD A94.05 2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00588
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN Pe AMN P| TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW . 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 DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct, especially his unlawful...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00033
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. However, based upon the record and evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant’s reason and authority for discharge inequitable. Applicant contends he should receive an upgrade in his discharge characterization to honorable and a change in RE Code because he engaged in no misconduct while on...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00596
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 | CY2010 | FD-2009-00191
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. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge. The Board noted the issue was common result of miscommunication, at the time of discharge, when the applicant is briefed that their discharge will automatically be upgraded after six months.