AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

X

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORCANlZATION OFCOUNSEL

r

--

•	'i

,  • :, . :, • · •

-

TING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
					x	
					x	
					x	
					x	
					x	

MEMBER SIT

ISSllES

A94.5S

INDtX NUMBER

A67.10

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFJCATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TICE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

ll&AJUNC DATE	CASE  NUMB&R

01 May 2014	FD-2013-00810

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 subm it an application to the AFBCMR.

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

-'• 1 '  1	I  '

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OFntt:AIR FORCE PERSONNELCOUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARC& REVl&W BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR.££ WING, JRD JLOOR
ANDREWS AFI,MD l876l-7t01

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00810	

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 inequitable because he was discharged based on a charge that he was acquitted from.  The records indicated the applicant received three Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Admonishment, and three Letters of Counseling for misconduct.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  Documents that were submitted by the applicant show that the charge of DUI was dismissed after he entered a plea of Nolo Contendere to DTCD Stop Sign. A Nolo Contendere plea, while not technically a guilty plea, has the same immediate effect as a guilty plea, and is often offered as a part of a plea bargain.  A plea of Nolo Contendere is not an acquittal of charges.  The Board opined 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