AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAM K OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE  INITIA L}	GRAOE	A FSN/SSA N

·'-------------------------- .'	AB

·'-----------------'

-------------------------!

-·-- ·---··

'   ---------------- '· 	

TYPE GEN
---

I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I

RECORD REVIEW

COUNSEL	NAME OF COll NSt;L AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

'.

.----------------------------------

.

r-:'
''

.

i-':
''

.

i-':
''

.

'
"---:
'
'----------------------------------

--···-·-

AIJIJRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION 0>" COll NSEL

 	VO;J;':lt QJ'/fJIE BOARD
'  ·'   " j ,,,,.,,   '"'''""· ··  '
HON	GEN	UOTl lC	OTHER	DENY
x x x
x x

ISSUES	A92.21	INDEX NllMHEI<	A66.00	EXHHIITS   SUBMITTED  TO  THE   BOARD
A93.01	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	-·-·
A94.05	2	APPLICATION  FOR  REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
A92.17	3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		HRIEF OF PERSON NEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING Of PERSONAi. APPEARA NCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

25 Jan 2007	FD-2006-00048
. •.AP)lLlCAN'f'S ISSUE AND THE l"!OARD'S Ol!Cll IONAl RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON nrn ATTACl-IED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISION At RATTONAl.E

Case heard in Washi ngton, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to subm it an appl ication to the AFBCMR

Names and votes wil l be made available to the applicant at the applicant's req uest.

.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------	.

.

''
'
.....-·..--·-----.·-...........g:.........................r·-·- --:i;,i:--- --··-·	'
•••••••••••••••••••••••••
"	INDORSEMENT	DATE: 2/6/2007
TO,	FROM:

SAl'/MRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNt;L COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST,  SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH A FH, TX 781 50-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MIJ 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-2006-00048	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeal s 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 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. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 1 5 and four Letters of Reprimand for misconduct. The appl icant recei ved an Article 15 for previous overindulgence of intoxicating liquor, which resulted in applicant being incapacitated for proper duty performance. He was punished with a reduction in grade to Airman Basic. He received a Letter of Reprimand for marijuana use which led to his discharge action. He had further misconduct  in which he was administratively disciplined for failure in alcohol abuse treatment, and failure to go. 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 states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's  duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3. The ORB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job. However. no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the heari ng. The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

Issue 4. Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when he was young and immature. The DRB recognized the applicant was 20 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 appl icant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief