AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAM.I!: OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FlRSTMIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUJllSl:L	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x

....

VOTE OF TIIE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b}(6)	x .#

-
....

....

lSSlJ£S	A92.21	INDEX NUMBER	A67.90	EXHIBITS SUBMTITED TOTHE BOARD
IORDERAPPOINTING THEBOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OFPERSONNELFILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

x * #
x .# x * #
x .#

TAPE RECORDING OFPERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARlNG

HEARING DATE	CASENUM8£R

12 May 2016	FD-2014-00280
APl'UCANl"S ISSUI!AND nm BOAaD'S IJl!CISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCtlSSED ON 1lll!ATl'AonlD AIR.RlltCE lllSCttUm!REVIEW BOAJU> DllCISIONAL RATIOlfALI!.

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.

Narrative reason # RE Code *

-
(b)(6)	I
,_,		I
INDORSEMENT	DATE: !lm72016
TO:	fROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OFTHEAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR -ORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

55-0 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535COMMAND DR, EEWING,3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANl>REWSMll, MD 20761-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00280	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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.

Pursuant to 10 USC 1553 this board included a member who is a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with training on mental health issues connected with post traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury and/or special training on mental health disorders.

FINDING: The Board finds insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant's discharge.

DISCUSSION: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline

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. The applicant's record of service included: one Article 15, one Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment, one Letter of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included sleeping while on post and failing to go on time (3x).

The applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when he was young and immature. He claims that he has since matured. The DRB recognized that the applicant was 21 years of age when the discharge took place. The Board opined that the applicant was no younger than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to Air Force standards of conduct. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's service was appropriate due to the misconduct.

A discharge is upgraded only if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. After a thorough review of the record and advice from the mental health specialist, the Board found no indication that any mental health issues had an impact on the applicant's misconduct or on his discharge. Additionally, the Board found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, change of reason and authority for the discharge, or change to the reenlistment code.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural 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.	

Attachment: Examiner's Brief