AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSNISSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X	RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS Al'ID OR ORCAl'ilZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

A67.90

l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLJCATION 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

HE.ARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

03 Oct 2013	FD-2013-00544
--	---·	-	-· - -	--	-	-	-	--	'  ---- ---p  -·  _ _
.	. '

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

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.

[	II	--------. -

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STRE.ET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX78150-4742

-	.	...	.	.
F1tOM:
SECRETAR\' OFTHE Alli FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE RE\IJEW BOARD
!SlSCO.'™AND DR. EE WING. JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AfB,MD 20762-'7081

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00544	

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.

ISSUE:  Applicant received a General discharge for A pattern of Misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and states his Article 15 is invalid. The records indicated the applicant received one Article 15, six Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling, and one Records of Individual Counseling.  His misconduct included failed to show for class at FTAC, failed to go to mandatory appointment on time, failed dorm inspection and subsequent re-inspection, assaulted female by striking her in the face, failed to obey order from SNCO, failed to shave prior to duty, failed to follow medical quarters order of restriction, failed to go to duty on time, and involved in POV accident resulting in a citation for leaving the scene and no insurance on the POV.   The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. Additionally, the Board found no evidence in the record that would invalidate the Article 15 received by the applicant. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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