AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

.'------------------------------------- .'	AMN

-' -------------- ·'

'-------------------------------------·'	' ------- -------·'
TYPE  GEN	x	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	I	RECORD  REVIEW
· ·v.

/
\'ES	No
x

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

1

::•1•1 111111! {i• I ·······

':':;:j y····:·:,    ··-: '-"-'''''-'>;.,;,.,:,,,,	. ....... .

.  h/	••••••

-'

'""'

MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN······	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
------------------------------------	x

X*+

x

h

r->

------------------------------------

X*+ X*+

ISSUES

A94.06

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

i!1l11£.....	' Jl	lj	. ,\	:?:'I>

1	
.r

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	
I

        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 HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

15 Nov 2006	FD-2005-00180

•'AIM'- ..t nn ·..	·	. .

l<L"•'••	... ..	<><·······

'  ·,  · JiititC  .,	;,TIOl\lfl:  ;I

<• ····    •..     	

..... ... ]}\.·	·-...t..•.•. .iii' ·' . .. .....•.i•i .	' \}.

..	··::;:;.:...

.

.,   _                 '•,· .... ,

,,,-,_,_:.:_:··_-:_    - ,:,,

···········	·..··   . ..
Case heard in Washington, D.C. via video teleconference with Travis AFB, CA. Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.
Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

* CHANGE RE CODE
7 CHANGE REASON AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTf:_RITY	11	.
'

'

'

'

'
'

······

I
''
''
''

-1'.

TO:

;;:.>;.1 • .·•.·.··•	I

-- -- - -,"-- ""1NU(f¥£M:Elf- - -;17;•7:7- - - -·---·r ,r •-- - -	-- -''-r•·b'Att:''lti' m
'  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, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00180	

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Travis AFB, CA via video teleconference with Andrews AFB on 15 Nov 2006. The following witness also testified on the applicant's behalf: applicant's  father, Mr. 
The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  The Board grants the requested relief.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon the  record  and  evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUE:  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because he was immature and it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received one Letter of Counseling, two Letters of Reprimand and one Article 15, for misconduct that involved two off-duty alcohol related incidents and twice having an unauthorized guest in the dormitory.  The DRB noted that the applicant was referred to ADAPT program
after the second alcohol related incident and that no further alcohol related misconduct or incidents occurred after the second incident and completion of the ADAPT program.  The two incidents of an unauthorized guest in the dormitory occurred ten days apart and the Board examined the details of the circumstances concluding that the second incident showed poor judgment  and warranted stem disciplinary action.
Although the applicant contended he was immature, the DRB noted he was 22 years old at the time of discharge and was older than most first-term airmen.  The Board noted that although the applicant received a referral 2 EPR which closed out 14 Jun 04, that the applicant's duty performance was documented as excellent and the applicant was a valued team player considered to have an excellent growth potential by supervisors.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members; however, the Board also noted there were no further incidents prior to initiation of discharge action 4 months later during which time the applicant continued to satisfactorily perform military duties.  Although the applicant did not contest his discharge, the DRB concluded that the discharge was too harsh based on the totality of the evidence of record, including the nature of the misconduct, the excellent duty performance, potential for growth, testimony during the Board proceeding, and post service conduct
that reinforced the positive assessment made in service.

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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an honorable discharge. The applicant's characterization should be changed to honorable, and reason for discharge should be changed to Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief