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

'------------------------------------ '·

' --------------- ·

TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
(  .·	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x

u---------------------------	- -1-	ING

VOTE OF TBE BOARD
HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

X*

''

''	X*
-:

''

''	X*
'--!

'

''	X*

'

-:
''	X*
'---------------------------------------------
ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	+:+:)iJ?>>	,EH$'.IBIT    IJBMlTT$. TO 1Jltil:U$0ARD     .··•·
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

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 Aug 2006	FD-2005-00447
APPl,JCANT'S'ISSUEANlY'rHE BOARP'Sil)ECISIONAl. RATIONAL ARE DJSCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED .AIR l'ORCE DISCHARGE     VIEW BOARD DEClS!Q)'lAI, RATlONALE     ...
. :•	...	• w   •••	.. ·.
Case heard in 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

L

,sir.111•T-t.111.llJlll.Vll"Ol>l\FJ>... -  ...... - _,_ - _;t _ - - - - _ _,, _ - - - - - - - ---- - - - - - - - - - -"  tr..ill4.1:1JVll ""'-ll•Ha..P.R.>;.';11h:r- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
''
''
  ------------------------ --------------------------------------J ------------------------ ----- --------- 	
. ..... •	.. .	..	lNDORSEMENT	DATE: 812812006
TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SU ITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 781 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-2005-00447	

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 and change of reason and authority for discharge 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:

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant was discharged for misconduct as a result of minor disciplinary infractions. He received two Article  15's and a Letter of Reprimand for misconduct.  The first Article 15 was for being derelict in the performance of duties by shredding active medical documents.  He received a suspended reduction to airman, forfeiture of pay and 30 days of extra duty.  The second Article 15 was for driving under the influence of alcohol.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to airman, 20 days extra duty of which 10 days was suspended and a reprimand.  The Letter of Reprimand was for unauthorized use of a government computer by downloading and playing video games. 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