Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00049
Original file (FD-2009-00049.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

  
  
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW
COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ~ , ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL ~ |
" ONGTE OF THE BOARD =
ed Lai sae ae fs ay
HON GEN | UOTHC OTHER DENY
x
x
x
ISSUES A93.23 INDEX NUMBER A67.90 “EXBIBITS SUBMIT EED TO THE BOARD
A92,35 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD _
A94.05 2_ [APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
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
HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER :
24 Jun 2010 FD-2009-00049

 

 

 

  

“APPLICANTS ISSUP.AND. TRE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DIS

  

CUSSED ON THE ALTACE TED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL: RATIONALE,

sa apa
gees ae

  

 
 

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.

 

 

rer

 

INDUK Stave NT 802) aie / cee ADATES 7/6/2010.
10; FROM: “
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
SAD EEE oT eg AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1435 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

 

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD-2009-00049

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.

FINDINGS: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an
inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUES:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and based on isolated
incidents. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, a Letter of Reprimand, and three
Letters of Counseling for misconduct. His misconduct consisted of failure to go (2x), failing to obey a
lawful order, failing to obey and being disrespectful, being drunk and disorderly, and being disrespectful to
an NCO. The Board took note that applicant had been diagnosed with clinical depression. After review of
the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong and
therefore, his contention is without merit. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the

applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. 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.

Issue 2. Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the
service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports,
letters of recommendation and other accomplishments. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct
offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was
appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job. However, no
inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing. The Board
concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized xxhis term of service.

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 the applicant 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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00078

    Original file (FD-2009-00078.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    *Reason and Authority +Reenlistment Code EUR SOT a f s NE TO: FROM: ; SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL Ban EES AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD §50 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD-2009-00078 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00152

    Original file (FD-2009-00152.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO TILE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 14 Jul 2010 FD-2009-00152 ‘ABELICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARDS DECISIONAL: RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED ATR FORCE DING ree ee SS ae Biel nos LARGE BEVIEW-BOARG DECISION! The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00093

    Original file (FD-2009-00093.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIMF OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 01 Jul 2010 FD-2009-00093 CC OAPPLICANT’SASSUB AND. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00033

    Original file (FD-2009-00033.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. However, based upon the record and evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant’s reason and authority for discharge inequitable. Applicant contends he should receive an upgrade in his discharge characterization to honorable and a change in RE Code because he engaged in no misconduct while on...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00550

    Original file (FD-2008-00550.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL bic. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge. Aftcr a review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong or that in his almost two years of service was unaware of the Air Force policy...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00556

    Original file (FD-2008-00556.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ~ ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMRFR SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY E+ X*+ X*+ X*+ X*+ | : ee ISSURS EX : CHE : A94.55 INDEX NUMBER 4 67 49 EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD 1 JORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD oo 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF...

  • AF | DRB | CY2011 | FD-2010-00273

    Original file (FD-2010-00273.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW weg NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING. © ~ Hon | GEN | UorHc | oTHER | DENY ~ ~~ | x stan ISSUES A92.35 INpEANUmPER 4 66.00 ae Fectaee enn eee A92.21 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD A92.01 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL...

  • AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00203

    Original file (FD2008-00203.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) PERSONAL APPEARANCE NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION TYPE GEN AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD GRADE SRA AFSN/SSAN x RECORD REVIEW ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY X X Xx X X ISSUES A94.05 INDEX NUMBER A67.10 ee A I ae 1_|ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2_|APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3_|LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00156

    Original file (FD-2009-00156.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND GR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL VOTE OF THE:BOARD MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY xX x x x SS ws 7 jl — ms mm Tr a 5 ms ae Tn ISSUES A93.19 INDEX NUMBER AG67.10 EXHIBITS SU MIL EES A93.23 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THEBOARD A94.05 2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00142

    Original file (FD-2009-00142.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE ATTACHED AIR LORCE DISCHARGE REV EW SOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE. Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant’s request. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.