AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW
| NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
RADRADOHD ornare
HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY
Xx
Xx
x
x
x
ISSUES A94,53 INDEX NUMBER A67.10
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 BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING
HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER
26 Jan 2012 FD-2010-00416
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.
FUNDERS Bee Taal
SAF/MRBR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 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-2010-00416
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 submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge. The record indicates
the applicant received one Article 15, and four Letters of Reprimand. His misconduct included violated
squadron policy by having a disk player while on duty, failed to go to an appointment, took part in or made
derogatory comments regarding homosexuals, failed to properly document AF Form 1975, and failed to
obey a no contact order. The Board opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had
ample opportunities to change his behavior. The applicant stated he was told his discharge would
automatically be upgraded. The Board noted the issue was common result of miscommunication, at the time
of discharge, when the applicant is briefed that their discharge will automatically be upgraded after six
months. While a discharge may be upgraded after six months, the upgrade is by no means automatic. A
discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took
place at the time of discharge. After a thorough review of the record, the Board found no evidence to justify
an upgrade of the discharge characterization, reason for the discharge or the reenlistment code.
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
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00191
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. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge. The Board noted the issue was common result of miscommunication, at the time of discharge, when the applicant is briefed that their discharge will automatically be upgraded after six months.
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00063
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. After 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 23 months of service was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use. The Board noted the issue was common result of miscommunication, at the time of discharge,...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2007-00416
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AFSN/SSAN pe AMN | | PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY INDEX NUMBER ISSUES A93.01 A67.10 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2010-00376
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 Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity...
AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00416_13
GENERAL: Theapplicantappealsforupgradeofdischargetohonorable.TheapplicantwasofferedapersonalappearancebeforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclined andrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbased ontheavailableservicerecord.Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinentdataontheapplicantandthefactorsleadingtothedischarge. FINDING: TheBoarddeniestheupgradeofthedischarge. ISSUE: ApplicantreceivedaGeneraldischargeforMisconduct- MisrepresentationApplicantcontendsthereasonfordischargeisinequitable.
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00093
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-2010-00406
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW NE) NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY xX XA X*+ X*+ X*+ ISSUES A92.21 “INDEX NUMBER A67.10 no A93.01 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 | CY2015 | FD-2015-00023
GENERAL: Theapplicant appealsforupgradeofdischargetoHonorable andtochange thereason andauthorityforthedischarge. TheapplicantwasofferedapersonalappearancebeforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclinedandrequeststhatthereviewbecompleted based ontheavailableservicerecord. Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinentdataontheapplicantandthefactorsleadingtothedischarge.
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2010-00437
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. ISSUE: Applicant received a General discharge for Failure in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Treatment Program (ADAPT) Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was based on two isolated and immature mistakes in sixteen months of service. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2010-00348
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. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge. Applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge.