AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVI EW BOARD REARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST M IDDLE INITIA L)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE  GEN	x	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	I	RECORD REVI EW
COUNSEL	NAME OFCOUNSEL ANO OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS ANO OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL
YS	N•
x
VOTEOF THE BOARD
M EMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	X*
-
x	*
-
*	x
-
X*
-
X*
ISSUJ>S	A93.23	IND&X NUMBER	A67.10	EXHJBITS   SUBMTITED  TO Tut   BOARD
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPL ICATION FOR REVlEW OF DISCHARG E
3	LETTER OF NOT!FICAT!ON
4	6RlEF OF PERSONNEL  FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADOITLONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TLME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMOER

04 Jun 2015	FD-20 13-00236
APPUCM'T'S ISSUE ANO nlEBOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON nu;ATTACHED Alli. FORCE DISCHAR.OE REVIEW BOAJl.D DECISIONAL llATIONALE.

Case heard in Wash ington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the A FBCMR.

*Narrative

(b)(6)	-

INDORSEMENT	DATE:   6119/2015
TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECR 'TARY or THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

15 COMJ\IAND DR.EE WING. JRO FLOOR

RANDOLPH  AFB,  TX  78150-4742	ANOR&WS Al'O, MO 20761-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00236	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB),  without  counsel,  at Andrews AFB on June 04, 2015.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:
Exhibit #5: Applicant's Contentions/additional  supporting documents

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:  The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted . In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption , to include evidence submitted by the applicant.  The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. In order to adhere to Mental Health Amendments to 10 USC 1553, a physician with specialized training on mental health disorders was present for this board. The applicant's record of service included one Article 15, four Letters of Reprimand , and two Records of Counseling.  His misconduct  included failure to be on six ring telephone standby missile monitor duty, failure to complete Career Development Course in allotted time, failure to shave and failure to go on time (4x).

The applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He stated that his misconduct was directly related to his mental health condition and sleep disorder.  After review of the records, there was no indication the applicant suffered from a mental disorder at the time of his misconduct that would have mitigated his actions and rendered the discharge process improper or inequitable.  The administrative actions taken against the applicant gave ample opportunities for him to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the applicant's mjsconduct  was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate

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.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedura l and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation , 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 that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged .