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

'	'

--------------------------------·
:	:
------------------------------- ·

:-------------·:
AB	'	'
-------------

TYPE G EN

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE

x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

VO'I' OF THE BOARD
1---·-·..·- """'-"''"' ..,................_.. _

MEMBER  SITTING	!ION	GEN	lJOTHC	OTHER	DENY
X*+ X*+ X*+
X*+

ISSUES

A95.00 AOI.00

INDEX NUMBER	A67.90

EXHIBITS SUBMlTTEQ.TO THE BOARD·
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD

X*+

2	APPLICATION !'OR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELFASE TO THE BOARD
l--+--A DD1=T 1o=N A L-E=xH1=B=n=s,..s.,"·u'"=13M1=n() A TTIMEOF-	·---
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE  I IE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

21 Feb 2007	FD-2006-00267
- l'UCANT'S 1$$U,£''ANDTHE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON Till! ATTACHED AIR fORCI:! OlSCHAROl!;IU!VIEW BOAl\U DECISIONAi- RATrONALE

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.

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenlistment Code

'	'

.-- - - - - - - ,.,....;':'\.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -'°- - - - /.] _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.   ----	----
i	r
''	''
'-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ·c-=:: - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -,- - - - - - -·g·- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - · c - - - - - - - - - - - - - -'
. 'i .'.. '	··  ·	:	INDORSEMENT	· .	·	.	DATE:  2/2312001
FROM•

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

SECRETARY  OF THE AIR  FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR f"ORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD W762-7002

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

CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00267

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE

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

ISSUE:

The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record.  The applicant has expressed a desire to have his discharge upgraded so that he may reenlist into the armed forces.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records indicated applicant had received a Summary Court Martial, an Article  15, and a Vacation for misconduct.  The Summary Court Martial was for
unlawfully entering the apartment of a civilian.  He was punished with a forfeiture of pay, 11 days confinement, and 10 days hard labor without confinement.  He received an Article 15 for allowing another airman to store illegal steroids in his dormitory refrigerator and willingly injecting another airman with what he believed to be illegal steroids.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Airman Basic, suspended forfeiture of pay, 45 days of extra duty (suspended), and a reprimand.  The Vacation action was for unlawfully entering an apartment with intent to commit a criminal offense.  He was required to forfeit pay  for two months and perform 45 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.

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