AIR FORCE D ISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, :FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

'

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

GRAllE

AlC

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

TYPE GEN

I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

"""'"'Q.,,	''''''  NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTIN G

UOTHC

OTHER

DEN Y

-' ------------------------------------- :	X*
-:'
'	X*

X*
...':
'
X*
--':
''	X*
''--------------------------------------

ISSUES

A92.35 A93.19 A93.0I A92.0I A93.07 A94.05

INDEX NUMBl:R

A67.00

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW or DISCHARGE
3	LETTER  OF NOTIF!CATION
4	BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOAR D
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SU BMITTED AT TI ME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDI NG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE

CASF;  NUMBICR

28 Jul 2006	FD-2005-00436

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 will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's req uest

*Reason and Authority

/'
_ 1_cf¥.ftlir 9!.'!E,;r,;'2 - _ _ _ _ _ ff-?q:-_ _ _ _ _ z:_ z_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ( ;_Nf.1.:'L 9fJ!,'2'¥."J_E_s! E- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .,
:
:	'

l>A'llll!:

----------------------------------------------------------------r ·----------------------------------------------- ·
1N:lilJllSEMENt	7/3112006

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SU ITF 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

Sl:CRETAllY OF TllF. AIR FORCE Pl:RSONNEL COIJNCIL AIR FORCF. DISCHARGE Rl:VIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND PR, l<:E WING, 3RD FLOOR 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-2005-00436	

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

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. Although not expl icitly stated the applicant suggested that his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and that he made irresponsible decisions at isolated points in his career.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two Records of Individual Counseling and four civilian convictions for misconduct.  The Article 15 was for failure to go to appointed place of duty and overindulgence in intoxicating liquor leaving the applicant incapacitated for the performance of duties.  As a result, he was reduced in grade to airman first class.  He also received two Letters of Counseling for being late for duty and failure to obey technical orders.  The applicant also had four occasions of misconduct with civilian authorities resulti ng in conviction for two charges for Driving Under the Influence and two charges of                 domestic violence/battery and disorderly conduct.  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 miscond uct 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.  Although not specifically stated, applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when he was young.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 25 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 administrati ve 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