AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REV IEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME or SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FlRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSNJSSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X	RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS ANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

'	-	---	•	--- -- ..-- •• •,.,... -·· • w,

MEMBER SITIING

HON

GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

AOl.45

INDEX NUMBER

A67.10

1 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 SUBMUTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OP PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

Hl!ARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

13 Mar 2014

FD-2013-00772

-	- - -     -	- - -----  - ---...-.,-----:-- --.-::. ..
.:	.	., ·" '	,

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 AFCMR.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

-

I	-	- ---	-  -	--
1	.	'	'  "     ::.

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OFTHEAIll FORCEPERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535COMMAND DR.&E WING, JRD 11.00R
ANDREWS AFll, MD 20762 '7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00772	

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 -Minor Disciplinary  Infractions

Applicant contends discharge was improper because legal counsel was not made available to him.  The records indicated the applicant received one Article 15, one Letter of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling.  His misconduct included failed to follow directions and playing with cellphone, lied to a NCO, failed to refrain from using unauthorized notes to cheat on exam and failure to go.  After a complete and thorough review of the applicant's records and the evidence provided by the applicant, the Board found his contentions to have no merit. The applicant was offered an Article 15 (AF Form 3070) on 16 Dec 2011.  On 21 December 2011, the applicant initialed block 3 of the AF Form 3070, stating that he consulted legal counsel, accepted the Article  15 punishment and presented a written presentation.  Furthermore, the applicant was notified of his commander's recommendation to discharge him on 13 January 2012.  The applicant signed a memorandum dated 17 January 2012 acknowledging receipt of the commander's recommendation and indicated he had consulted counsel on the same day.   The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career.  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