AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSNJSSAN

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

X	RECORD REVIEW

vtS	No
x

ADDRESSAND OR ORCA,.,17.ATION Of COUKSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

OEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x
x
x

A62.00

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REV IEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LElTER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL 'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMnTED AT TIME Of PERSONAL APPEARA NCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llEARINC UATC	Ci'SE NUMUO:R

13 Mar 2014	FD-2013-00695

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a persona l 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.

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

SECRETARY Of THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIRFORCE OISCHARCC REVIEW 801'1U> IS.15 COMMAND OR. EE WINC.lRD FLOOR ANDRE WS Af"ll,MO 201'2 7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00695	

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 Misconduct - Fraudulent Entry

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The specific reason for the discharge was based on the applicant deliberately leaving pertinent information regarding his criminal background off his request for security clearance (SF86).  He states his recruiter completed all of his paperwork and he believed his recruiter has access to all of his criminal records.  After a complete and thorough review of the records, the Board found the applicant's contentions to have no merit.  The applicant's SF86 was completed on 1 October 2009 and did not indicate that the applicant had any criminal background. The applicant signed the form on 1 October 2009, indicating it was a true and accurate statement.   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