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

-' --------------------------- .'	AB

;..-··------------..

:	'	' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _'
---------------------------- ·
TYPI•:  GEN	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COl!lll$11L ···	NAME  OF COllNS I. ANll OR ORGANIZATION	AllllRF;SS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

VOTE OF THE BOARD
'''''''''"'"'""';.,..,.,..		. -_,., _.,,.."
HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

----------------------------------	X*+

1-o

1-o

1-o

----------------------------------

X*+ X*+ X*+
X*+

ISSIJES	A93.23	INDEX NUMBER	A67. 10	EXHIBITS  SlJBMlTTEDlO  THE  BOA·RD ·
A94.05	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE 130ARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR  R EVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTll'ICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONN EL f!LE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOAR D
ADDITIONAL EXI llBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HF

HEARING DA TE	CASE NIJMDER

25 Jan 2007	FD-2006-00204
·J\l>PLlCANT'$ ISSOE AND ll!E llOARO'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE OTSCUSSED ON THI! ATTACHED AIR fORCE OISCHl\ROE REVIEW 801\RD DECISIONAt RATIONALE

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the rightto a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the A FBCMR

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

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenlistment Code

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------	--------------- 	
''
- ----- - - - - --··-··-- -·-- - -'--- - -------- - - "b,;f - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r • - - - - -·g·- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -''
f  NDORSEMENT	!	DATE: 2/612007
TO,	FROM,
SAf/MR13R	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE Pfi:RSONNEI.  COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOAlUI
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB,  TX 781 504742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762·7002

AFHQ l:<'ORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00204	

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

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,  change  of  reason  and  authority   for  discharge,   and  change  of reenlistment code 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:

Although not explicitl y stated, applicant contends discharge was ineq uitable because it was too harsh.  He contends his misconduct was based upon his depression due to his severely ill baby.  He has also expressed a desire for upgrade of his discharge to allow for reenlistment into the armed forces.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Vacation,  12 - AETC Fom1341 's, and two Memorandums for Record for misconduct.  Applicant received an Article 15 for fail ure to go to appointed place of duty.  He was punished with forfeiture of $575.00 pay for two months and thirty days of correctional custody (suspended).  The Vacation action was for failing to adhere to the phase program by staying at a hotel off of the installation.
He was punished with thirty days of correctional custody.  Applicant was also administratively disciplined for being late for formation on two separate occasions; curfew violation, failure to shave and uniform violation, failed room inspections, failure to go, and smoking in his dorm room.  The ORB 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 requi rements 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