Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2005-00085
Original file (FD2005-00085.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
I 

I 

YES 

I  No 

IITIAL) 

I 

I 

ISSUES  A94.05 

INDEX NUMBER  A67.90 

- 

2 
3 
4 

I 

APPLICAI'ION FOR KLVIL'A OF DISCHARGF. 
LI II'LK 01:NOI'IkICKl'ION 
UKIEF 01  PEKSONNCL rll.1. 
COUhSFl  '5 KFI.F.ASF  TO THE UOAKO 
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF 
PERSONAL APPEARANCE 
I  TAPE RECORDMG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

AEAIUNG DATE 

28 Jul2005 

CASE NUMBER 

FD-2005-00085 

Case heard at Washington, D.C. 

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance withlwithout 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. 

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

ANDREWS AFB. MD 10762-7002 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 

(EF-V2) 

Previous edition will be used 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00020

    Original file (FD2003-00020.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    For this infraction and subparagraphs "b", "c", and "d" below you received an Article 15 on 3 Oct 01. b. .................... ..-..-..-..-..-..-.- 1 For this misconduct you received an Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority in support of this recommendation are attached. AF Form 3070,3 Oct 01 2.

  • AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2005-00147

    Original file (FD2005-00147.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, based upon the record and evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's UOTHC discharge is too harsh and upgrades it to a General. The records indicated the applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge for misconduct, specifically, drug use. (Change Discharge to Honorable) Issue 1: I request that the "other than honorable" discharge from service dated 19971009 be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

  • AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2004-00059

    Original file (FD2004-00059.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s, a Vacation action under the UCMJ and two Letters of Reprimand for unauthorized use of a government computer, financial irresponsibility, failure to pay is government credit card and for dereliction in the performance of his duties. Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, M D (Former AMN) (HGH SRA) 1. In addition to military counsel, you have the right to employ...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0212

    Original file (FD2002-0212.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0212 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. In view of the foregoing findings the board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0212 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD ee (Former AlC) (HGH A1C) 1.

  • AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2005-00043

    Original file (FD2005-00043.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    2 0 0 R ANDREWS AFB, hW.20762-7002 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous edition will be used AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER m-2005-00043 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. ISSUE: The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for wrongful use of marijuana. Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority in support of this recommendation are attached.

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00117

    Original file (FD2003-00117.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    e AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 7 NAME O F SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) TYPE I PERSONAL APPEARANCE I 4;. (No appeal) (No mitigation) (2) 26 Apr 99, Maxwell AFB, AL - Article 92. Ffl 2 0 0 3 - 00//7 != Attachments: Article 15, 12 Sep 01

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00113

    Original file (FD2003-00113.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 «| APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3° | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 15 Jul 03 FD2003-0113 COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING “APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW. CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0057

    Original file (FD2002-0057.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time of the discharge, after consulting counsel, member submitted a statement in her own behalf requesting an honorable discharge. '02/07/08/ia FD 2002 — 4057 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE _ AIR EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND 26 DEC 2001 MEMORANDUM FOR 12 FT W/CC FROM: 12 FTWAIA SUBJECT: Legal Review - Administrative Discharge - 4 HQ AFPC 1. Approve the Respondent’s separation with a General Discharge, with or without suspension of the discharge’s execution for probation and...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00103

    Original file (FD2003-00103.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD03-0103 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. For this misconduct you received an LOR on 24 Apr 02. f. You did, at or near Sheppard AFB TX, on or about 23 Apr 02, fail to go at the time prescribe to your appointed place of duty, to wit: Physical Conditioning (PC). For this misconduct you received an AF Form 174, Record of Individual Counseling, on 17 Dec 01.

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0514

    Original file (FD2002-0514.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0514 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. CONCLUSIONS: 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 that the applicant was provided full administrative due process, In view of the foregoing findings the board further concludes...