AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

GRADE

x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER Sl'ITING

HON

GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x
x x

ISSUES

A94.S3
A92.03

INDEX NVMBEJI

A67.10

l 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 HEARING

HEARING DAT£	CASE NUMllEJI

OS Sep 2013	FD-2013-00547

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 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OJ nu:Alli roRCE PERSONl'IEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE U:\llEW BOAJID
tm COMMAND DR,EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 10762-1001

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

CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE     FD-2013-00547

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 he accepts responsibility for his misconduct, but doesn't feel like it should take away from his accomplishments during his career in the Air Force. The record indicates the applicant received two Article 15s and a Vacation action. His misconduct included failure to go to duty on time (3x). Due to lack of evidence and supporting documentation to explain the discharge, the Board concludes that the misconduct was a significant departure from the conduct expected of all military members. The Board relies on the presumption of regularity and finds the characterization; reason for discharge and the reenlistment code were appropriate.

Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

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