AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

-·

;------------------------
''" ------------------------ '

GRADE

AIC

AFSN/SSA N
:-------------·:
------------- !

TYPI<: GEN

I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

1-- co_uTN'" SE_L_"""' NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	I	No
I	x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

VQTE OF THE BOARD
1--- ...l,. }«WNUUUWW . :. '.'.:,.»•••*•l<,'.l.--:.._.	,;,_ .	---,-	_

MEMBER SITTING

'

·------------------------------------
'
e.!'
''' '
''
''
c-i
'

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

X+ X+ X+
X+

X+
'-------------------------------------

ISSUES

A92.35 A92.01 A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A67. 10

E'XHJBITS SUBMITTED ll.fl l$0ARD
l	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR  REVIEW 01' DISCHARGE
3	LRTTER OF NOTJ FICATJON
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

13 Mar 2007	FD-2006-00207

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.

+ Reenlistment Code

·-- - - -	j _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ...n, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.----------------1
'''

'

--- -- --- --- -- ----,- --- -,- ---- --- --- --- --,Nno'RSE:Ni	1

- - -  -: - - -

'
"fI-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --u.f ,jt2

001

10:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCF- PF;RSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
I5J5 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00207	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrad e of discharge to honorable 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 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:

Issue 1 . Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and based on isolated
incidents.  The records indicated the appl icant received two Article 15s and a Vacation for miscond uct. Applicant's first Article 15 was for failure to go to appointed place of duty and dereliction of duty for failure to refrain from using his government travel card for personal and unauthorized use.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Senior Airman, suspended forfeiture of pay for two months, 45 days of extra duty, and a reprimand.  His Vacation action was for failure to go to appointed place of duty which resulted in a forfeiture of pay for two months.  His second Article 1 5 was for being derel ict in the performance of duties by negligently failing to follow Flight Operating Instruction 91 -5.  He was reduced in grade to Airman First Class and performed  14 days of extra duty.  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 appl icant'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.

CONCLUSIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludts that the discharge was consistent w i th 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