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

.

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

SRA

-.--------------..
'!. - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·

!!.-----------------------------
TYPE  GEN	x	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YES	I	No
I	x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

..

...------------------------------------	x

.

---...:	x

.

--:...	x

.

>---...:	x
' ..	x
'!.-----------------------------------
ISSUES	A94.11	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
A94.05	1	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 HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

13 Nov 2006	FD-2005-00426
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard via video teleconference between Andrews AFB, MD and Travis AFB, CA.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board 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.

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

.	.

...

:..--

-----------------------------------	----------------------·-·c     ·-----,-,---------------------------------
INDORSEMENT	DATE:  11/13/2006
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 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2005-00426

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) without counsel via video teleconference between Andrews AFB, MD and Travis AFB, CA on 13 Nov 2006.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #6: Applicant's Opening Remarks

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

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and didn't take into consideration his time in Iraq, the death of his grandfather and his wife leaving him and taking his children out of state.  The records indicate the applicant received an Article 15 for failing to report for mandatory PT and six Letters of Reprimand, to include: going TDY to a training class that he'd already attended, failing to get out of a vehicle and provide "spotting" assistance to the driver who subsequently backed into a light and caused damage to a government vehicle, lying to the first sergeant concerning the number of traffic tickets he'd received, failing to report for mandatory PT, failing to utilize his mandatory PT time properly, and failing to answer his cell phone and respond to an air conditioning emergency at the Officers Club.  The ORB 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.  As such, 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 and reenlistment code should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief