Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00249_13
Original file (FD-2013-00249_13.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

T, FlRST MIDDLE INJTIAL)

GRADE



ONAL APPEARANCE
x        RECORD REVIE

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

x

HON
GEN      UOTHC    OTHER
DENY
x x x
x
x


1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'SRELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE     CASENVMBER

02 Aug 2013      FD-2013-00249

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.











SAF/MRBR
550 C STREETWEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781504742

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISUIARGE REVIEW BOAJll)
1535 COMMAND DR, El!WING. JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-'ltol


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



AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE
CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00249

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. 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.

ISSUE: The applicant contends that he did not fraudulently enlist in June of 2009. Member documents on entry physical in May 2009 that he had never had any episodes of dizziness, memory loss, head injury, or seizures. In November of 2009 member passed out during a run in last week of basic training and subsequently received several referrals and evaluations for seizure disorder, which would be an unfitting condition. The medical records do not substantiate a definitive diagnosis of seizure disorder. However, the medical record revealed memory loss in October 2007 and May 2008. Additionally in July 2009 member reports a medical history to the primary care provider of a possible seizure as an infant, and three concussions in the past four years while playing football and rodeo. While a history of seizures is unsubstantiated, the evidence of previous concussion and memory loss is apparent. Therefore, the Discharge Review Board concluded that fraudulent entries were made on the May 2009 entry physical.

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00371_13

    Original file (FD-2013-00371_13.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    GENERAL: Theapplicantappealstochangethereasonandauthorityfor thedischarge,andtochangethe reenlistmentcode. TheapplicantwasofferedapersonalappearancebeforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclined andrequests thatthereviewbe completedbasedontheavailable servicerecord. Theattachedbrief contains availablepertinentdataontheapplicantandthefactors leadingtothedischarge.

  • AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00695

    Original file (FD-2013-00695.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    GENERAL: Theapplicantappealsforupgradeofdischargetohonorable.Theapplicantwasofferedapersonal appearancebeforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclined andrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbasedontheavailableservicerecord.Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinentdataontheapplicantand thefactorsleadingtothedischarge. FINDING: TheBoarddeniestheupgradeofthedischarge.ISSUE: Applicant received...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00145

    Original file (PD2009-00145.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Discussion: The CI was diagnosed with PTSD and was found unfit for PTSD at 10%. VARD (diagnosed as Tinnitus) 20080516 and rated it at 10% based on exam of 20080107: The condition is noted in your service treatment records as of May 3, 2007; We have assigned a 10 percent evaluation based on examination findings that has determined, your tinnitus is persistent in nature; the diagnosis that has been given is ringing in the left ear. There is no hearing loss present on the right and there is...

  • AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2005-00249

    Original file (FD2005-00249.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. (Change Discharge to Honorable) Issue 1: I was discharged due to having two Article 15's (sic). For your actions, you were punished under Article 15 UCMJ on 1 Sep 04 consisting of a suspended reduction to...

  • AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00338_13

    Original file (FD-2013-00338_13.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIRFORCEDISCHARGEREVIEWBOARDHEARINGRECORDNAMEOFSERVICEMEMBER(LAST,FIRSTMIDDLEINITIAL)GRADEX RECORDREVIEAFSN/SSANADDRESS ANDORORGANIZATIONOFCOVNSELMEMBERSITTINGGEN UOTHCOTHERxxA67.90 A93.07 lORDERAPPOINTINGTHEBOARD2 APPLICATIONFORREVIEWOFDISCHARGE3 LEITEROFNOTIFICATION4 BRIEFOFPERSONNELFILECOUNSEL'SRELEASETOTHEBOARDADDITIONALEXHIBITSSUBMITTEDATTIMEOFPERSONALAPPFARANCETAPERECORDINGOFPERSONALAPPEARANCEHEARINGl:f.EARJNGDATE CASENVMBER19Juf2013...

  • AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00665

    Original file (FD-2013-00665.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    GENERAL: Theapplicantappealsforupgrade ofdischarge tohonorable.TheapplicantwasofferedapersonalappearancebeforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclined andrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbased ontheavailableservicerecord.Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinent dataontheapplicantandthefactorsleadingtothedischarge. FINDING: TheBoard deniestheupgradeofthedischarge. ISSUE:...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01572

    Original file (PD-2013-01572.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board gives consideration to VA evidence, particularly within 12 months of separation, but only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the severity of the disability at the time of separation. The MEB examiner noted the headaches were secondary to a head injury and the CI was being treated with medication. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they...

  • AF | DRB | CY2011 | FD-2011-00212

    Original file (FD-2011-00212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    GENERAL: The applicantappealsforupgradeofdischargetohonorable. TheapplicantappearedandtestifiedbeforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB),withoutcounsel,viavideo teleconferencebetweenAndrewsAFBMarylandandTravisAFB Californiaon22 Sep2014. The followingadditionalexhibits weresubmittedat thehearing:

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00224

    Original file (PD2009-00224.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Air Force Informal and Formal PEBs and AFPC appear to have applied DoDI 1332.39 and rated the CI’s seizure disorder based on his social and industrial impairment (which they considered to be mild) and not on the frequency of seizures as directed by the VASRD The rationales for the Formal PEB and AFPC decisions stated they found evidence that the member’s neuropsychological deficits were directly related to his seizure disorder but that rating both conditions would constitute pyramiding...

  • AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2010-00394

    Original file (FD-2010-00394.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. The Board found the no impropriety to warrant upgrade of the discharge and opined the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. Issue #3 - Applicant contends her discharge was inequitable because the other individual was discharged under the force shaping program...