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

'----------------------------·'
'

AlC

.---- --- ----- - -
''	''

I

"---------------------------·'
TYPE  GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

I x
MEMBER SITTING

x	I	RECORD	"--------------

REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEi.

. .•	,,.·'·""6 ·· VOTE Olli
"""'ijj;li

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTl lER	DENY

l	-m --·-·•••••••••••••m------------------+-----+-----+------+------+	1
X*+

,_;
'

X*+

-':
'.
.
'

ISSut;S	A93.01 A93.07 A94.05

INDEX NUMBER	A67. 10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

X*+

X*+ X*+

·... ,,..,.., .,.. ,,

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

22 Sep 2006	FD-2006-00012

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 request

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenlistment Code

I

SAF/MRBR

----------

1
i... ·.   .   .   .      .i.i.ii.ii..i.ii..i.'.i. .i.i..i. •.i.   .i...:,.,.,..J,,...,'.·,..,·.,,·.,·.•,.•,·.·,.·..•.,',..,•,.·.,·...·....·,.·..,·...,··...,•.·..,•.·.....;·...,•...,•,·,,•...·.,....,·..•...,·...,•,·..:.·..·,,..·,...,,JfM	TI.:·.I,,;;;\,JJl!1'.i'
"',, t      ,#»'!,

FROM:

DATE: 9125120116

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCIC PERSONNEi. COUNCii. AIR FORCE DISCHARGF: RVl  W HOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78I50-4742

1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD 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-2006-00012	

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 ofreason 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. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He has expressed a desire for upgrade to allow for reenlistment into the armed forces.  The records indicated the applicant received three Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling, a Record of Individual Counseling, four AETC Form 341 's and an AETC Form 125 for misconduct.  While training at Sheppard AFB, the applicant received AETC Form 341's for skipping PC, failed room inspection, failure to follow school guidance and using an electrical device after he was told not to.  He was disciplined further with Letters of Reprimand for failing student housing area room inspection, failure to report to duty, dirty clothes under his bed, weari ng a soiled uniform during open ranks inspection and a safety violation.  He was removed from training (AETC Form
125) 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 mem bers.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2.  Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 19 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