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

..--------------------------- ·..
--------------------------:

AB	...------------------.
----------------- :

TYPE    UOTH	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
ColJNS!);l.	NAME OF COUNSEL  AND  OR ORGANIZATION	ADORF:SS  ANll OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x

--  -·

MEMBER SITTING

........	..

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

..

...

.

...

..

----.	...
h	...
---------------------------------- ·

:.••/·>:,;,	VOTE OF THE BOARD

- "" ..	 	

<               u           •	....,... .,,,.
!ION	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
··-
X*
-.-	---
X* X* X*
X*

ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBIOK	A67.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
I	OR DER 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 SUBMITTFD A I  TI M E OF
PERSONAL  APPEAR ANCF
" u-.,-			.-.--
lA PE R ECORDI NG OF PE:RSONA L A PP"ARA NCE HE
..
HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

25 Jan 2007	FD-2006-00120
APPLICf\NT'S  S$tJI! AND THl'_llvARD'll Dt-.i.;1: lvNAL llATIO!llAllj\!Ufl,llSCOSSEO ON 'THE. ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DllClSloNAL'RA.tlO.ti.At:"

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 submit an appl ication to the AFBCMR

Names and votes wi ll be made avai lable to the appl icant at the applicant's request.

* Reason & Authority

I

..§LGl'J.E QI;: !Hlrn!!!.l!L•••• •.<.J •••• ./•••••• ./:J........2..........._ ]§!i!i.l'i1:1J JtE.   Q1!!]!:§1Jl.f.l'Qt'. ••••••••••••••••••••,...
......	..

.	INDORSEMENT	DATE:    2/6/2007

-----------------------------------------s- --------------------1··----- ------------------------------------ · 	
TO'	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SIOCKETARY OF THF. AIR FORC'f: PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE KIOVl!OW BO.\RO
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND  DR, EE WING, JRD  FLOOK
RANDOLPll  AFB, TX 78 J 50-4742	ANDREWS  AFB, MD 20762·7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASt: NUMBER

FD-2006-00120	

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for upgrade  of discharge  to  general  and  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge.

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.

FIN DINGS:  Upgrade of discharge and change ofreason and authority for discharge 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.

ISSUE:

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received two Letters of Reprimand and was found guilty of three charges by a Special Court Martial for misconduct.  The Special Court Martial Board found the member guilty for failure to go to appointed place of duty; for being derelict in the performance of duty by allowing a person under the age of 18 in his dormitory room; failing to refrain from allowing a guest to sleep in his dormitory room; and by commiting the offense of carnal knowledge.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Airman Basic, 4 months confinement and required to be identified as a "Sex Offender".  Applicant was administratively disciplined with two Letters of Reprimand for being late for duty 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.

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