AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE	AFSNJSSAN

ONAL APPEARANCE	x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS 1\1'10 OR ORGl\l'llZ.l\TION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x•+

X*+ X*+ X*+

X"'+

A67.10

1  ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO 1HEBOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITSSUBMITTED AT TIMEOF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

03 Oct 2013	FD-2013-00441

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.

*Narrative Reason and Authority
+RE Code

TO:

SAFIMRBR
550 CSTREETWEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH  AFB,TX 78150-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY OFnu; Alll FORCE PEllSOl'INEL COUNCIL Alll FORCE DISCHARG E REVll:W BOARD 1535COMMAND Dll, EE WING.• 31.lD FLOOR
ANDREWSl\FB, MDio762-7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00441	

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 and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:   The request for the upgrade of the discharge, to change the reason and authority for discharge, and to change the reenlistment code is denied.

ISSUE:    Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions

Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when he was young and would like another opportunity to serve his country in the United States military. The record indicated the applicant receive one Article 15, one Vacation, and three Letters of Reprimand.  His misconduct included lied to a SNCO and failed to go to duty on time (4x).  The DRB recognized the applicant was 20 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was the same age as the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

CONCLUSION: 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 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief