AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER ( LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
----------------------------------- '

'	AB

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

TYPE GEN

PERSON AL APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL ANO OR ORGANIZATION	AIJIJRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTllER

DENY

x

SSUES

A95.00/AO.Ol

INDEX NUMBER

A67. 10

x x x x

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICA TrON FOR  REVI EW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRI EF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBI'I S SUBM ITTED AT TIME   F PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

13 Sep 2006	FD-2006-00020

ONIBEATIACHEP

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 appl ication to the AFBCMR.

Names and votes will be made available to the appl icant at the applicant's req uest.

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

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND  IJR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 21176POOZ

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

CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00020

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

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 the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: The applicant stated that he would like be able to utilize the Montgomery GI Bi ll as his justification for requesting an upgrade of his discharge. The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s, seven Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling, one Record of Individual Counseling, and one Memorandum for Record for misconduct. The misconduct included making false official statements, absent without leave, late for work, failure to follow orders, returning from leave late, failure to pay just debts, failure to go, dereliction of duty, stealing food from refrigerator, and failure to obey a lawful order. 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