AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REV IEW BOARD HEARJ NG RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE M  :MBEK {LAST,  -rnsT MIDDLE I NITIAL)
f--------------------------------
--------------------------------

GRADE

SRA

AFSN/SSAN

:

--------------.
:

TYPE  GEN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	RECORD REVIEW

------·---·---··---+----'-----------------------1
ADllRl:SS AND OR ORGANll.ATION OF C()llNSEL

x

MEMBER SITTING
:----------------------------------- .	x

x
'           ·----------------1-------+-----+-------1-----+------l
x
x x

ISSUES

A93.01

INDEX NUMBEll

A67.90

I	OROER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR  REVIEW  OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF 01' PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO Tl IE BOARD
ADDI   ONAL  ·xHIBITS SUBMIT 'ED AT   IME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

II EARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

29 Sep 2006	FD-2006-00027

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.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ c<;a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _i('. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ 119-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

SAF/MRl3R
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

SECRETARY OF TH: AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLO()ll
ANDREWS   FB, MD 29762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-Y2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REV IEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00027	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains avail able 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:

Applicant contend s that his wrong doing was based on immaturity and bad choices.  Applicant was discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.  Member received two Letters of Reprimand, one Record of Counseling, one Letter of Admonishment, one Article 15, and one Vacation of Article 15. The record reflects in February 2002 member lied to an Non-Commissioned  Officer about his available leave balance and willfully viol ated the commander's leave policy by traveling out of the local area, more than the maximum eight hours drive.  On 18 March 2002, member received an Article 15, suspended until  17 September 2002, for dishonorably
failing to pay $1,554.1 0 due to the Veterans Administration  Federal Credit Union.  On 24 July 2002, member failed to show up for class and was late fr)f the class within the same week.  On 1 August 2002, member was involved in domestic altercation in which the local police was called, resulting in a civil arrest for an outstand ing warrant.  On 24 August 2002, member assaulted a senior airmen by striking him with his fist, thereby, vacating his Article I 5.  The Discharge Review Board noted that member's commander only vacated the Article 15 after repeated instances of misconduct.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 23 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he did not know right from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was the same age as the vast majority of first-term members who
properly adhere to the Air Force's stand ards of conduct.  The ORB 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