A r R FORCE  orSC H A RGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEA Rf NG  RECORD

NAME  O.F SERVICE  MEMBER  ( LAST,  FIRST  M IDDLE  I N ITIAi.)
...----------------------...
----------------------

GRADE

AI C

A FSN/SSA N

.	.

-.-------------.
I!,. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,!

TYPE  GEN

I	PERSONAL        APPEARANCE

x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

COUNSEL	NAME Ot' COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
-1                  n.s--1r---N_o      ,
I x

ADDRESS AND UR ORGANIZATION Of COIJNSEL

\!:QJi.E. OF THE gl!j)\!Rif)

1

1 c.:."·,..··,.·•..,i,,··'"'c'ccc'cc' ·  ·---.-- ---'--'+'·'·""·' ······---- ---

. ········.···

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

...
.
.
--.:
.

.

--:

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

X+*

X+*
r---------------------+------+-------+----+-----+--	---·-
X+* X+* X+*

ISSUES

A93.01 A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A49.00

1	ORDER APPOI NTING THE BOARD	 	
2	Al'l'LlCA TlON FOR REVI EW OF DISCHARGF
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSON N EL FILE COUNSEL'S RFl.P.ASE TO THE BOA R D
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARA NCE

TAPE Ri-:CORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HL

llEARING DATE

CASE NllMBER

22 Feb 2007	FD-2006-00256
:'"'""r;l;,' i i  .RATIONAL ARE l:l)t: :pss ug TE n ,
Case heard in Washington, D.C.

m •nor>c

.·.·.    ............. -.. /'!! i

-

REVIEW BOARD

. .... .	.:llilill.i1ilii1L-.. ··..·..··.._---. " < !

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel , and the right to submi t an appl ication to the A FBCMR.

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

+ Reason and Authority
* Reenlistment Code
!------------ ------------------------------------------C..----------------------------------------------------------------

';..---------1

 		..
.	.
.. • • • • • • • • • • • • • ..  ,   ..,.• • •• • • • •:::::, .   ::::::::::::  .,.,:.,.,:,.,:..,.:....  .. • • ••• • • • • •  .. ...  ...   ....   ,...   .,.:.:.:·: • • • . T • • • • • • ••• • • • • • ...   ...   .,.,:.,.,:,.,:,.,.:,.,.:.,.:.,.,:.,.:::.  .. • • • • • • • • • • • •· ...•.  ...;!ii,.!;;.,7:::::.... ...   • • • • • • • •

•

'	INDORSEMENT	1

DATE: 2/23/7007

TOo

SAF/MR BR
550 C STREET WEST, SUIT!': 40
RAN DOLPH AFB. TX 781 50-4742

[_

SECRETARY Ut" THE AIR 'OO<CE PERSONNEL    CUllNUI.  AIR FORCE DISCllARGE  REVIEW  80ARf>
1'3' COMMAND DR, EE WING, JllD t'LOOH ANDREWS AFB, MD l076l-70\ll
_ _

AFHQ  FORM   0-2077,  JAN   00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition wi 1 1 be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00256	

GENERAL:	The  appl icant  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  d ischarge,  change  of  reason  and  authority  for  discharge,  and  change  of reenlistment code 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 d i scharge.

ISSUES:
Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received two Letters of Reprimand, one Record of Individual Counseling and ten Memorandums for Record for misconduct.  The misconduct included numerous instances of financial irresponsibility, housing inspection failure, eviction from base housing for multiple inspection failures, failure to pay rent, causing damage to the apartment next door, and a civilian traffic ticket for no automobile insurance. 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 contends that he should not be penalized indefi nitel y for a mistake he made when young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 22 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 applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief