Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2006-00126
Original file (FD2006-00126.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

NAME OF SERVICE hlEhlBER (LASI', FIHS'I' MIDDLE INITIAL) 

GRADE 

A1C 

AFSNISSAN 

TYPE  GEN 
CC)UNS$L 

X 

PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

RECORD REVIEW 

- - "  

NAME OF COIJNSEL AND OR ORGANILA I ION 

ADDRhSb AND OH OHCAN17ATlON O r  COllNSEL 

YES 

No 

X 

I 

I 

MEMBER SITTING 

H o N  

I 

VOTE OP 'THE BOARD 

r - u l ~ O r ~ ~  

I 

C;rN 

OTHER 

I 

DENY 

ISSUES 

A67.10 

INDEX NUMBER 

A93.25 
A94.05 

2 
3 
4 

AI'I'I.ICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHAKGP. 
I.VI"1'F.R  OF NOTIFICATION 
BRIEF OF PERSONNEI. FILE 
COIJNSEL'S  RELEASE TO THE UOARL) 
ADDITIONAI. EXHIBITS SllBMITTED A'l'I'IME  OF 
I'F.I

Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00046

    Original file (FD01-00046.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s and a Vacation of Suspended Non-Judicial Punishment for failing to obey two separate lawful orders by wrongfully refusing to receive the Anthrax vaccination. Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD FD-01-00046 (Former AB) 1. I reviewed the attached administrative discharge package FR2 14-23-6 189,28th Supply Squadron, and find it legally s supports the 28 SUPS/CC's...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00032

    Original file (FD2003-00032.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD03-0032 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s for failure to obey a lawful command to take the Anthrax vaccination. (Appeal/Denied) (No mitigation) (2) 23 Jan 01, RAF Lakenheath, UK ~ Article 90.

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0391

    Original file (FD2002-0391.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD02-039 1 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AlC) (HGH SRA) 1. Attachments: Article 15, dtd 31 Jan 00.

  • AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2004-00029

    Original file (FD2004-00029.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Attachment: Examiner's Brief I FD2004 -00029 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AB) (HGH SRA) MISSING DISCHARGE DOCUMENTS 1. (Change Discharge to...

  • AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2003-00521

    Original file (FD2003-00521.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSNlSSAN t AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD MEMBER SITTING u s A94.11 7 INDEX NI:MBER A67.90 -- -- I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD I 1 1 2 / APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 4 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER Case heard at Washington, D.C. The Board...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00172

    Original file (FD2006-00172.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD BEARING RECORD ------ X NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION PERSONAL APPEARANCE AB RECORD REVIEW C.-.-..-..-...I ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSFL -.-.q.m.--.w rwE GEN $$"~@*~d~~~f%y YES No X MEMBER SITTING 1 I ORDER APPOINTTNG THE BOARD 2 1 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 1 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 1 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 4 COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDI'I'IONAL EXHIBITS SUBMI'II'EL) AT TIME...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00397

    Original file (FD2006-00397.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In view of the foregoing findings, the Board furthcr 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 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AB) (HGH SRA) 1. In addition to military counsel, you have the right to employ civilian counsel.

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00249

    Original file (FD2003-00249.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for willfully disobeying an order and an Article 15 for willfully consuming alcoholic beverages while under the legal age of 2 1. You, who knew of your duties, on or about 3 Mar 02, were derelict in the performance of those duties in that you willfully consumed alcoholic beverages while under the legal age of twenty-one, as it was your duty not to do. In addition to military counsel, you have the right to employ civilian counsel.

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0320

    Original file (FD2002-0320.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0320 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AMN) (HGH A1C) 1. Direct that the respondent be discharged from the Air Force with a General discharge with or without probation and rehabilitation under AFI 36-3208, section H paragraph 5.49; c. Forward a recommendation for separation under paragraph 5.49 with an Honorable discharge to the General Court-Martial Convening Authority, AFSOC/CC (AFI 36-3208,...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0214

    Original file (FD2002-0214.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's issues are listed in the attached brief, ISSUE: The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh in that it was based on one isolated incident in 6years and 11 months of service with no other adverse actions. 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...