AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

YES
x

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORCANIZATION Of COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

X*

X* X* X*

ISSUES

A94.56

INO&X 1'UM8ER	A67.10

X*
llBITS    SUBMJ'ttED'to	JJ)ii()A:RO

1 ORDER APPOINTIN G TIIE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFI CATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llF.ARINC DATF.	CASE NUMBER

13 Mar 2014

FD-2013-00778

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, tbe right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to subm it an application to the AFBCMR .

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

*Change Reason and Authority to Secretarial Authority

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78 150-4742

SECRETARY OFTHE AI R FOMCt: PEllSONNEL COUNCI L AIR FORct DISCllARCf. R£Vl£W BOARD
153S COMMAND DR. CE WINC.JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB.MD 2'762-7011

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00778	

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 grants the requested relief.
ISSUE: Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received three Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling, and one Records of Individual Counseling. His misconduct included failed to go to duty on time (4x), failed to complete CDC volume within 30 days and dereliction of duty.  Although the Board did not condone the applicant's misconduct, they found his misconduct to be very minor and opinioned he should have been afforded the opportunity to rehabilitate.

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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the overall quality of  applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable  discharge and the reason for the discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief