AI R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MJOOLE INITIAL)	GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

:------------------------------- :
-----------------------------

AB	:·--------------·:
' ---------------·'

TYPE  GEN

I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

COWL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
1-  ---.''-'	i
YES	No
x

ADDRESS ANO OR 0RGANJ7,ATl0N O•·COU NSEL
VOTE OF THE BOARD
1- -- ----"'"'T'"-"---r	1

MEMBER  SITTING	HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

-11 • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  ---------------+-- --t--- --+-- ---+- ---+	1

'''
...':
'''
_:'

'

''' '
--:
'
---:
'

ISSUES

A93.0l

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

EXHIBITS SUBMrITED TO THE BOARO
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S R l'l,l;Asr: ro TH E BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXH IBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

X*+ X*+
X*+

X*+ X*+

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARA NCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

14 Sep 2006	FD-2006-00018
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THI! BOARD $ DllC!$10NAL RATIONAL AU OISCUSS!tl) ON THE ATTACHED AJR fORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

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

l.P.J'l1'JPJ1.lJil!6 QQ --- - ""'1••...r.:7.- ••- • ...r••_ ••:;::"_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J 19i'J>JPJl.l_Ql'J.!Q iJC ijijlilJ •..-..:_ ••_._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
''	''
'	'
--············--- ····· , ··gc············
,1)•	<	•	INOORSEMENT	DATE: 9/18/2006

TO:

SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

FROM,

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE Rt;Ylt;W 80AR0
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB. Mil l076l-700l

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00018	

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 of reason 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 authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. The applicant cited his desire to serve once again in the armed forces.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, one Vacation, seven Letters of Reprimand, and one Memorandum for Record for misconduct.  The Article 15 was for failure to comply with Phase Program by violating curfew. He was punished with a suspended reduction in grade to airman basic and 30 days of correctional custody. The Vacation action was for being absent from his place of duty resulting in a reduction in grade to airman basic.  The applicant was further disciplined with seven Letters of Reprimand for being disrespectful to a commissioned officer and student leader, breaking Phase, failure to attend mandatory formations, demonstrating a lack of military bearing and using tobacco during duty hours.  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 contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 21 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