AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INJ11AL)

GRADE

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x x

A67.10
A93.0l	1 ORDER APPOCNTING 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 HEARING

HEAJllNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

17 Oct 2013	FD-2013-00463

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.

TO:

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

FltOM:

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1$35COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB,MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00463	

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

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 Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.
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:  The applicant was discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for minor disciplinary infractions.  Applicant contends his discharge should be upgraded because the majority of his  Air Force time was honorable. He also states that he now understands his mistakes and has matured as a person. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand, and seven Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included failure to go to duty on time (4x), failure to pay government travel card, failure to answer chapter review questions for CDC, failure to complete CDC on time, failure to obtain required documents for civil court appearance, failure to report to court on time, failure to follow policy for opening and closing the mini CTK, and failure to go to duty on two separate occasions. The Board opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity
to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

Although not specifically stated, applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when he was young. The DRB recognized the applicant was 25 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 older than 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