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

'------------------------------ '	AMN

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

'     -----------------------------'	--------------:
TYPE   GEN	x	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL ANO OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS ANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	I	No
I	x
VOTE OF THE' BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
·'----------------------------------- .'	X*+

''	''
'

'

'	'
'	'

X*+

'

'
e-!	'
'	'

''	''

X*+

_:'	''
'	'

''	''

X*+

'

'
e-!	'

''	'	X*+

'	'
'
------------------------------------
ISSUES	A67.90	INDEX NUMBER	A92.21	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
A93.01	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
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

14 Nov 2006	FD-2006-00068
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard in Washington, D.C. via video teleconference from Travis AFB, California.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board 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

.SLl.:.1\1.4.,'t.I Ollii: Jl"C'OPl;'lli'til • •• • •• • •• • •• • •• • •• • •• - ••••• ..1. ••••••••••• _l,J;:,1,c.;l\il,t,i;:1.1,11,1i:,,O ... .P"11.PW,i:.Uidf: • • •• • .;.•••••••••••• 	
''' ''
L•••••••••••••••••••• ·	· •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••J•••••••:t;'l•••••••••••••••••··----- •••••
INDORSEMENT	DATE:  11/15/2006
TO'	FROM'
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING. 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78I50-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00068

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) at Andrews AFB, Maryland, without counsel, via video teleconference from Travis AFB, California, on 14 November 2006. The following witness also testified on the applicant's behalf:  Chief  Warrant  Officer-3  (CW3)  Autery,  U.S. Coast Guard; the applicant's father.

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

ISSUE:

Issue I .  The applicant submitted no issues of impropriety, but contends that his discharge was inequitable because he was young and immature during his short time in the Air Force.  The applicant states that he has matured during the four years since his discharge and requests an upgrade so that he can re-enlist in the Air Force.  He states he has a strong desire to serve his country and is now mature enough to be a good Airman. The applicant's misconduct includes failure to pay DVD late fees, underage drinking, failure to obey an order to sign out through the Charge of Quarters desk, failure to stay awake during duty hours, a six-day absence without leave, and lying to a noncommissioned officer by stating that he was not talking while waiting for the chaplain when he was talking (during Correctional Custody).  The records indicate the applicant received two Article  l 5s, one Letter of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded that, though the applicant's service was honest and faithful, the negative aspects of his conduct outweighed the positive aspects of his military record, especially since he
only served for just over one year. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant takes personal responsibility for his actions while in the Air Force, rather than seeking to put the blame elsewhere.  The DRB also noted that the applicant has received strong guidance from his father since his discharge and will hopefully learn from his father's good example.  The applicant discussed many positive endeavors he has undertaken since his discharge, such as mowing the lawns of families of deployed military members, being a good role model for children, and attempting to start his own business.  However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

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