AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAM•; OJ<" SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

'.	''

....

''	''

·'------------------------------ .'
-------------------------------

'--------------'
AB	-----------·

TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
l_...c..o_v..N._SE_l,_-1 NAMf: OF COUNS L ANIJ  OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND 01< ORGANl/,ATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

X*+
X* ' X*+ X*+
X*+

ISS!JES	INDF.X  NllMBER	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD

A93.01	A67.10

1--------------------"--·--
I	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TllE BOAR D
ADDITIONAL EXHll31TS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAi . APl'EA RANCF

TAPF: R F:COR DI NCi OF PERSONA L APl'lA RA NCL' Ill

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

21 Feb 2007	FD-2006-00312
APP!.JCANT'S ISSUE AND 1'Hf ll()ARP'S DECISIONAL M'l'ION'Al.E ARE DISCIJSSl!O ON l'Hll Al"f ACHEO AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIJ!W IJOARD l)JlCISIONAL RATIONAl E

Case heard i n Washi ngton, D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, t he right to a personal appearance wit h/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

L

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

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenlistment Code

-·l ----------------------------,(} -----	----------------   -------------------------------------------------------,
'
!'
''-----------------------·---.,-------rzI	tM	;--------,---------i;x -------------------·---	-;

'' 001

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

FllOM,

SECRETARY   OF THE AIR  FORCE  PICRSONNt:f ..  COUNCIL AIR  FORCE  DISCHARGE   REVIEW  BOARD
1535 COMMAND  DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762- 7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00312	

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:

Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when he was young and immature.  He admits that he was having family problems.  He has expressed a desire to have his discharge upgraded to allow for reenlistment into the armed forces.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 19 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong.  The applicant received an Article 15 and five Letters of Reprimand for misconduct. He received an Article 15 for being absent from his unit for 9 days.  He was punished with forfeiture of pay for two months and 30 days of correctional custody.  He also was administratively disciplined for failure to obey an order, violation of curfew, failure to go, and violation of Phase.  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 ORB 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