AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

x
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANJZ.ATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

X*+

X*+

X*+

A67.10
A86.00	l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASETO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TCME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMJIER

17 Oct 2013	FD-2013-00622

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:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF 1llEALR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNOL
.\IRFORCE DISCHARGE  REVll!.W BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, El!WING,JRD FLOOR ANDREWSAJi'B,JllJ>  W76l-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00622	

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 (Primary) and Personality Disorder (Secondary)

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident and that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when he was young.	The records indicated the applicant received one Article 15, and one Letter of Reprimand.  His misconduct included failed to go to an appointment on time, failed to go to duty on time (2x), disrespectful in language to NCO, and disorderly conduct. The DRB recognized the applicant was 21 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