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

-' --------------------- '

----------------,

'	'	AlC	'	'

'·---- --- --- --- --- -----·'
TYPE GEN
I

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x

'

RECORD

----------------J
I	REVIEW

COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x

MEMBER  SITTING	HON
I

VOTE OF 1HE BOARD
GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

----------------------------------------	x *+

t-'

x *+
x *+

"	x *+
"	x *+
·-----------------------------------------
ISSUES	A93.0l	INDEX NUMBER	A67. 10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
]	ORDER 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

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

19 May 2006	FD-2005-00361
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard at 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.

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenlistment Code

I	rl
.';'.	- F_	? - .....-::?. •   '- •••d......<1.. •••••••• --" - •••••••• l	¥.	-PJ!:.S!EJ:l .............-
''	''

'	'

'	'

DATE:  512212006

-------------------------·--------------------i; ,--------------   ---------------------------------------- ·
INDORSEMENT

TO:	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 78I 50-4742	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-2005-00361	

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.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. The applicant cited his desire to reenlist in the Air Force to complete his obligation. The DRB noted the applicant's desire but concluded that his desire standing alone was not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

Issue 2.  Although not explicitly stated the applicant suggested that his misconduct was a result of his youth, immaturity and irresponsibility.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go to appointed place of duty.  He also received three Letters of Reprimand for disobeying a lawful order, making a false official statement and dereliction of duty; three Letters of Counseling for sleeping on duty, financial irresponsibility and reporting late to training; a Letter of Admonishment for failure to go to appointed place of duty; and a Record of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  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