AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARI NG RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER ( LAST, FI RST MlDDLlc INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSi\N

·'---------------------------- .'

A I C

.- -- -- -- -- - -- --.

i     TYPE                                                    =GEN............................	--I

--PE'R-SON AL APPEARANCE

----+x---I4-RE-CO-RD REVIEW	-

1---=	NAME OF COl•NSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRf.SS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COllNSH.
n:s	I	No
I	x

MEMBER SITTING

.'       ---------------------------------­
i-!'

'

'
i-:
'

HON	GEN

UOTllC	OTHER

DENY

X*+

X*+

'
---------------------------------- ·

X*+

ISSUES

A94.53

INDF.X  NUMBER

A67.10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISC! IARGE
3	I ETTER OF NOT! FICATION
4	BR IEF OF PERSON NEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARO
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL A PPEARANCE HE

HF.ARING DATE

CASE NLIMBER

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

·.. ; ·.........

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the A FBCMR

Names and votes wil l  be made available to the applicant at the appl icant's req uest.

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenlistment Code

''
- ;:(?--------:::--------..,-:=·--- -- -- -.- ·:::·::·- -- -- -- -· 	

-------------- ·'
':-'
'

y --·-::::: ·r ·- - - - - - -- - -	::::- --- - - - - - - - - - - .!

TO:	S>:Cl<llTARY OF THE AIR FORCE PF.RSONr< l. COllNCIL

SAl'/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUIT\' 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

AIR l"ORCE DISCHARGE RF.VIEW BOAKD
l J COMMAND DR, EE WING. JRD FLOOK ANDRf:ws AFB. MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AI R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00021	

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 to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.

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:

The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record.  He expressed his desire for upgrade of discharge to allow for reenlistment into the armed forces.
The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Vacation, two Letters of Reprimand, five Records oflndividual Counseling and four Memorandums for Record for misconduct.  The applicant received an Article 15 for failure to obey an order to not drive while on a suspended driver's license and for falsely altering the birth date on a military identification card.  He was punished with a suspended reduction in grade to Airman, forfeiture of $250.00 pay for two months, restriction to Shaw AFB for 30 days, and 30 days of extra duty.  He was reduced in grade to Airman as a result of a Vacation action for failing to refrain from using alcohol while under the age of 21 .  Applicant had additional misconduct and was administratively disciplined for financial irresponsi bility, derel iction of duty, being late for work, failure to make progress on CDC's, and failure to obey a direct order.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS:  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 that 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, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief