AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST l\UDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

X	RECORD REVIEW

AFSNISSAN

AODRESS MID OR ORCANlZATION OF COUNSEL

x

MEMBER srITING

HON

GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x
x
x

A67.90	•r   EXHIB	SlJBMlTIEDTO THE	'i'RD
1 ORDER APPOINTING HIE BOARD
2   APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOTIFIC"ATIO
4 BRIEFOF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONA L EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANC E HEARING

!IF.ARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

13 Mar 2014	FD-2013-00686

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Alli FOl\Ce DISCHAAGER£Vl!W90AllDDEQSIOll"1.    MTIONAl..E.
·"

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.

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

SECRETARV OFTHE AIR l'ORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCllARCF. REVIEW 80ARl.l 1535 COL•IAND DR.EE WINC, JRD Fl OOR ANDREWS AFB.MD  2t7U-7ttl

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00686	

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.  He states he was not given a proper chance to show improvement after spending 30 days in correctional custody.  Additionally, he states was unable to reach his assigned counsel and took the General discharge because he had no other choice.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s, one Vacation, three Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Admonishment, and two Letters of Counseling.  His misconduct included failed to follow lawful order, showed disrespect towards a NCO, acted in an unprofessional manner by failing to control anger, acted in an unprofessional manner and disrespected a NCO, failed to go to duty on time (4x), and failed to brief commander properly on equipment outages and disorderly conduct.  After a complete and thorough
review of the applicant's records the Board found his contentions to have no merit. The applicant was sent to correctional custody 1-30 May 2003.  Upon return, the applicant received one Article 15, one Vacation and one Letter of Reprimand.  Additionally, on 2 September 2003 the applicant acknowledged receipt of his discharge; stated he consulted counsel and waived his right to an administrative discharge board in order to receive a General discharge.  The Board opinioned 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.

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