AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF' SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
'.----------------------------------------- '
'    ----------------------------------------- '·

GRADE

AB

AFSN/SSAN
·--------------
''	''
-------------- ·

TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I

RECORD  R EV I EW

i-,,C,OUJM$&L     -t-N-A_M_E_OfCO_U_NSE'L_A_N_0-R_O_R_G_AN-lZA T 10N.     -------------+-A D_DR_ .S-S A_N_IJ_O_R_R_G.A N1;	0FC-01,-S-E_L	,

lYR.s-.1.---N_o_
I	x

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

X*+ X*+ X* +
X*+

X*+

ISSUES

A93.0l A92.17

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE  BOARD ORDER APPOINTING Tl IE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVI EW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER Of NOTI FICATION
4	BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COU NSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

14 Sep 2006	FD-2005-00356
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATION At ARE DISCUSSED ONTHEA'ttl).CHSO AIR FORCE tJISCtlAROl! Rl!VIEW .SOARD DECISIONAi. l\ATIONALE

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 AFBCMR

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

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenlistment Code

..'il!.ifllJlCl111.Rf.c.WUWI.. .... _._ .7-). _ ,_. /.:O.•:1.7.. ••••_ .7..._ .._ .._ .._. L!iloonLIBE!l.FJUWUl.idSJoi;:ll!i: - "- - _ -·- _ ••_ ••_ ••_ ••_ ••
':	':
''	''
'-------------------------- ----- ------------ ----------------- c------- ·rc ·----------------------------------- '
INDORSEMENT	DATE:  9/1812006

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RA N DOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

fROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL. COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE Rf:VIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS At'B, MD 20762·7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00356	

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 that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. The applicant has expressed a desire for upgrade of his discharge to allow for reenlistment into the armed forces.  He also contends he was ill-prepared for the environment which he was exposed to during his first assignment at Loring AFB, Maine.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article l 5's, a Letter of Reprimand, and two Records oflndividual Counseling for misconduct.   The applicant was administratively disciplined for failure to meet a mandatory appointment, failure to perform assigned duties, and operating a privately owned vehicle while under revocation.  He was further disciplined with an Article 15 for damaging a government window and for being drunk and disorderly.  He received a suspended reduction to airman, which was remitted on 30 Oct 91, and 14 days of extra duty.  His second Article 15 was for failure to go to appointed place of duty.  He was reduced in grade to airman basic, forfeited pay and required to perform  14 days of extra duty.  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.

Issue 2.  Although not explicitly stated, applicant implies that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments.   They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.
The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3.  Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 19 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.
The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

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