AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

X	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A94.0S

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

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 APPEARANC E
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NU lBER

17 0ct 2013	FD-2013-00619

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

FROM;

SECRETAR Y OFTHEAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW B()ARD
1533 COMMAND DR,l!lt WING.• lRD FLOOR
ANDREWSAFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00619	

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:
Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. He feels that he did many things worthy of an Honorable discharge. The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s, four Letters of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included making false statements to a SNCO, failure to go to duty on time, refusal to participate in prescribed unit training, misused Government vehicle for personal business and used Government Travel Card to fuel the vehicle, underage consumption of alcohol and stealing from another Airman. 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.

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