AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST J\fJDDLE ll'iITIAL)

GRADE

AFSNISSAN

RECORD REVIEW

ADDllESS AND OR ORC»lll.AT10N  OFCOUNSEL

x

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x
x
x

A67.10

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DlSCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED ATTIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HEARING

HEARINCOATE	CASE NUMBER

19 Jun 2014	FD-2013-00308

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.

SAFfMRBR
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OFTIJE AIR FORCE ttRSONNEI.. COllr<CIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535COMMAND DR, UWING, JRD FLOOR
AA'DREWS AFB,MD 20762.7081

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00308	

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

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 character 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 did complete 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. The Applicant's record of service included one Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand and three Letters of Counseling. The misconduct included failure to refrain from allowing an underage person to drink alcohol and failure to remain with base sponsored civilian at all times; failure to report to Hill AFB by Report No Later Than Date (RNLTD) and arrived seven days after RNLTD, with intent to deceive made false statement during interview; departed duty location without authorization and failed to go to duty on time; failed to report for Commander ordered additional duty; lied to an NCO (2x's), and fell asleep while operating a man up forklift during munitions operation.

Applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge but did state his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification for upgrade. The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on February 3, 2006) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade. The Board opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

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