AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00790	

GENERAL: The applicant was discharged on 10 Nov 01 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with General discharge for Misconduct. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The board was conducted on 14 Dec 17.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), but declined and requested the board be completed based on a records only review. The applicant was represented by counsel

The attached examiner’s brief (provided to applicant only), extracted from available service records, contains pertinent data regarding the circumstances and character of the applicant’s military service.

FINDING: The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable.

DISCUSSION: The DRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the narrative reason for discharge if such changes are warranted. If applicable, the board can also change the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code. 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 determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.

The applicant’s record of service included five Letters of Reprimand and six Records of Individual Counseling. His misconduct included: failure to inform his supervisor of his whereabouts, failure to comply with work center lunch policy, receiving a parking ticket and reckless driving, dereliction of duty, hit and run, failure to adhere to an order, disobeying a direct order of an NCO, failure to comply with vehicle safety regulations, failure to report for duty at the appointed time and place (x2), failure to comply with dress and personal appearance standards, misuse of a Government Owned Vehicle (GOV), driving with a suspended GOV license, allowing his spouse to drive a vehicle when she did not have the required license to do so, and making a false statement.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because he was discharged without due process, was not given a “fair shake,” and received a General service characterization for no reason.

The DRB noted that during the applicant’s discharge proceedings, he had counsel and submitted matters on his behalf in response to the discharge notification. Further, based on the extensive list of disciplinary infractions committed by the applicant, the board concluded the chain of command had adequate justification for discharging him with a General service characterization. The board also determined that, through the numerous administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career.

CONCLUSION: The board found insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge. Therefore, the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and his request was not approved.

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 22 Jan 18.  If desired, the applicant can request a	

list of the board members and their votes by writing to: SAF/MRBR (CITU), 550-C Street West, Suite 41, Randolph AFB, TX 78150-4743.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief