AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME or SERVICE MEMBER (LAST.FlRST MIDDLE INITJAL)

GRADE

X	RECORD REVJEW

AFSNJSSAN

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	OEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x •+

A67.10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TOTHE BOARD
ADDITlONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HF.ARING  OAT£	CASE NUMBER

01 May 2014	FD-2014-00024

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.
* Change to Narrative Reason
+ Change to RE Code

TO:

SAF/MRBR
SSO CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANOOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCllARCE REVIEW  BOARD ls.JSCOMMAND DR, EE WING,3RD FLOOR ANDR.EWSAFB,  MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00024	

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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 request for upgrade  of the discharge, change of reason and authority  for discharge,  and change of reenlistment code are denied.

ISSUE:  Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct:  Minor Disciplinary Infractions.

Applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable based on him being immature at the time.  The applicant also submits that is was explained to him at the time of his separation that even though he was not ready during his time in the Air Force, he would be ready in the future.  He also states that the reason he accepted the separation was to return in the future.  The record indicates the applicant received one Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand, and a Letter of Counseling.  His misconduct included underage alcohol consumption, breaking curfew, dorm room being in disarray with multiple security violations and evidence on tobacco use, violation of AETCI 36-2216 by entering a local hotel and failing to report the existence of hotel party frequented by airmen, and failing to go to mandatory formation on five separate occasions.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 20 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was older
than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  In regards to the Applicant being told that he would be ready in the future, The board noted the issue was a common result of miscommunication.   A discharge is upgraded only if the Applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  The Board opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant 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, reason for the discharge or the reenlistment code.

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, reason for the discharge,  and the  reenlistment  code should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief