AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
r ·---------------------- .	1

'' ----------------------- ''·

SRA	'	'
--------------:

TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
@l NSEL .	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEt YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

vo·r QF THE BOARD
,_.......,.,"'"""""'..""'"'"''"''.....'""''_,_..,,,	i.
HON	GEN	lJOTHC	OTHER	DENY
-------------------------------	x
µ
x
x
lo
x
.
x
--------------------------------
ISSUES	A92.21	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
A93.01	1	OR DER APPOINTING TI IE 130ARD
A92.01	2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
A92.03	3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
A94.05	4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOAR D ADDITIONAL EXH I B ITS SU BMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECOR DING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

05 Jul 2006	FD-2005-00366
Al'l'LlC;l;NT'S ISSUE ANO THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DlSCHAROE)U!VtllW BOARtl 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 avai lable to the applicant at the applicant's req uest.

}! !'.'ljj'p!tA	5!_  •••••/.J. J•• •d........2..............._ _l_S!i!J_R_E_<Jl !l_?_A_  5P.f. E_l".,1:_ _ •••••••••••
''

r • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Arn: 111112006

'':-- -,, ---·::7:·:·.---------- ·- ------------·v1Nffiis';iN;:--- --- ·
...;....:.:o.---'--··-· ._· _,........._·---- --.......-	'" ' '  ""·-  ....	'""'"'"    ··'·"···-··	....•.. , ,	' u....
TO:	l'ROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PF.RSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOA RO
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND  DR,  li;li;WING, 3RO l'LOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	AN DREWS A•·B, 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-2005-00366	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

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 is 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. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received two Article  15's, one Letter of Reprimand and one Record of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  The records indicated the first Article 15 was for driving under the influence of alcohol.
Applicant was punished with a reduction in grade to Airman and forfeiture of $100.00 pay for two months. The second Article 15 was for behaving with disrespect towards superior commissioned officers and orally communicating indecent language to a female bystander at a softball game with children in attendance.  The applicant was punished with a suspended reduction to airman, suspended pay of $150.00 for two months, and 45 days of extra duty.  The records also indicated applicant received a Letter of Reprimand  for a guilty plea for driving under the influence of alcohol and a Letter of Counseling for violation of safety guideli nes by not wearing a seatbelt while operating a government vehicle.  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.  Applicant states 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. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job as a department supervisor with the	However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing. The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

Issue 5.  Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefi nitely for a mistake he made when young and immature.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 24 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