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

.' ------------------------- ·'	AIC

i_ -_ -_ -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_.,

'	'

' ------------------------J '	'	'
PERSONAL APPEARANCE ·	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

TYPE

G EN	I

COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEi, Ar'lll OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS ANll  OR  0RGANl7.ATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOT   jliljf!l:IE BOARD	'

MEMBER SITTING

·······'···
HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

'

x

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

'

'
,...i
'''	x
h'
''
'	
'

x
e-:

'

''	x
e-:'
''	x
' --------------------------------- ·
ISSUES	A93.ll	INDEX NUMBER	A49.00	'EXJ¥1B1TS SUBMITTD TO THE BOi\RD'
A93.07	I	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
A94.05	2	APPLICATION  FOR REVI EW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRI EF 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

21 Feb 2007	f<'D-2006-00308
APP!.!CANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DliClSIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON Tf!E ATTACHED AIR FORCE DlSCHARtlll REVIEW BOARD DllCISIONAt RATIONALE

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.

----..r.- ------------------------ ...... -----------------	--------------------------------------------------------   .

'

'

'

''

- - - ---- ---- ----- ---- - -,..,._ - - -- • --J;L.- -a--------------------r - - - - - -- - -e-------------------x:- - - - - - - - - - - - -''
OORSEMENT	DATE: 2/2312007
TO:	FROM,

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY ot' TH AIR FORCE PERSONNEt. COllNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARG R;vrnw BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WI NG, JRD FLOOR
RAN DOI.Pl I A FH, TX 781 50-4742	ANDREWS AFB, Mil 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE  NllMRF:R

FD-2006-00308	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) but decl ined 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 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 discharge.

ISSUE:

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and he was having family and financial problems at the time.  He contends his wife had an uncontrol l able gambling problem.  The records indicated the applicant received seven Letters of Repri mand and three Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct.  Applicant was administratively disciplined for dereliction of duty (four separate occasions), unacceptable appearance, and financial irresponsibility on six different occasions.  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 appl icant was found to be appropriate.

Ifhe can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant shoul d consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board.  Ifhe should choose to exercise his right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual
evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive req uirements of the discharge regulation and was wit hi n 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