AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MlDDLE ll'<'ITIAL)	GRADE

X	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGA'.llZATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

A67.10

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LE1TEROF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED ATTIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING D.-.TE	C...SE NIJMHR

17 Apr 2014	FD-2014-00032

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 AFBCMR.

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

TO:

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

PROM:

SECIU!Tl.RV OF THE MR FORCE PERSONJl"E:L COUNCIL AIR YORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW llOAAD
1'35 COMMAND DR.EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS MB,MD m'l-7901

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00032	

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 of the continued actions he was accused of; he feels that he should have received an honorable discharge.  The records indicated the applicant received a Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment, an Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Admonishment.   The misconduct included failure to go to duty on time (2x's), failure to go to a mandatory appointment (2x's), failure to qualify on M-4 or M-9, and failed PT assessment.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. Also, the Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case in which to base an upgrade of discharge.  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