AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

--

NAME  OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

.'-------------------------------'
------------------------------   :

AMN

'...-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_   _'..

TYPE GEN

I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	l	RECORD REVIEW

r

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

HON

. .) ....

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

X*

X*

X*

X* X*

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
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

08 Feb 2007	FD-2006-00323
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND TflE POAIU>'S DECTSIONAJ, MTIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON Tf!E ATTACHED AIR, fi:\IMi:E l>!SCHAilGE RJNJEW BOAIUl DECISIONAL  RATlONA!,li
... .	....
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

1

fil""v'"'IOQi•lor,i, li'.P5'..-PP5'IO'. • • • • • ..-c;i. • . :J. .. ••• ••• • .4'7- • ••• ••••• ••• ••••• ••• .i&l..:.l\il;4.i;,T.l,Q. 011'.P".4- PP..PS"S' UVi'J\0"2. • • • • •.:=.• ••• ••• •• ••• ••
'

DATE£  Z/2312007

-...........-...·..·.·.....-.·..·...·...-......... -.....·..·..,-·--- - - - - - - - -.:...,:... .. ..-_-."." "." -.- - - - - ·_7 ,··..· - - -_, i-· - - "iza:"" - - -::-_------ - - "'..-.".' . - - - - - = - - - - -_- - ·u- - - - - - - - - - -.. .. ..- - - - - - - - -
INDORSEMENT
FROM·

TO'

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR  FORCE  PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
I 535 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-2006-00323	

GENERAL:	The applicant  appeals for upgrade  of discharge to honorable  and to change the reason  and authority for the discharge.

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 reason and authority for discharge 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:

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and he was not guilty of test compromising.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for misconduct.  The Article 15 was for being derelict in the performance of duties by willfully failing to refrain from reconstructing the National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians Test by using his memory or that of others.  He was punished with a forfeiture of $692.00 pay for two months and seven days of extra duty (suspended).  The Board considered the applicant's contentions along with the supporting documents within his record and determined 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.

Ifhe can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should 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 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.	
Examiner's Brief	

Attachment: