AIR FORCE  DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAM E OF SERVIO'. M EM BER ( LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

'	.

-'   ------------------------ ·'
------------------------ '

SRA	:··--- --- --- ---:
-------------:

TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

1- CONll!!J,;

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
""""l

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  Ot' COUNSEL

--"-'-'.......
YES	No
x

.

VOTE OF THE BOARD
,	,, .,,

···'·····--·-·- -----!

''' '

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTl lC

OTHER

DENY

X*+

'	X*+
--:'

'
--:'

X*+

'	X*+

--:'
''' '

0-----------------

-+-----

-+-----

+-----

--+----

-+----
X*+

--j

ISSUES

A95.00

INDEX NUMBER	A69.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD

AOl.00

1	ORDER APPOTNTTNG THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRJEf Of PERSONN EL Fll.b: COUNSEL'S RFl.FASF TO THE BOARD
A DDITIONA L EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TI M E OF
l'ERSONAL  APPEARANCE
!----+-----------------  ---
l'Al'b: RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARA NCE HE

r------------

-+-------------- -·-·-----

-+--

+----------------------

HEARING DATE	CASE NLIMBEK

	FD-2006-00476
Al'PLICANT'S ISSUE AN[) THE BOARD'S OECISIONAJ, RAT!ONAl. ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE OISCHAKGH REVIEW BOARD DF,CISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard in Washi ngton. 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 wi l l be made avai lable to the applicant at the applicant's req uest.

* Reason and Authority
+ Reenl istment Code

-;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------_,	_

_

'' '''
...':.. ........... -.......... .................... ...........-.-- - -. ...--...-----------·----·-·· ·---·····-··----·---·--····-·····-	......   	
OJNDORSEMENT	DATE: 5/2912007
TO,	FKOM:

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

s;CK>;TAKY OF nm AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW ROM<I> 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING. JRIJ t'LOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762·7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-Y2J	Previous ed ition wil l be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00476	

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 realized his actions while in the military were unacceptable and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record.  The applicant also expressed a desire to have his discharge upgraded so that he may qualify for reenlistment 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 the applicant received an Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand, a Letter of Counseling, a Letter of Admonishment, five Records of Individual Counseling and a Memorandum for Record for misconduct.  The applicant received an Article  15 for stealing a pair of lady's swimsuit bottoms and wrongfully rummaging through another airman's dresser drawer and handling her undergarments.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Senior Airman, suspended forfeiture of pay, and a reprimand.  The applicant had additional misconduct and was administratively disciplined for refusal
to participate in an alcohol abuse treatment program, impersonating an officer for the purpose of committing adultery, dereliction of duty, insubordination, being late for duty, failure to go, failure to use technical guidance while inspecting equipment and chewing tobacco around oxygen equipment.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the applicant's 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 equitabl e basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief