AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME Of SERVICE .\IEMRER (LAST, FIRST MIODLEINITl \L)	C.RAl)F.	AFSN SSAN
(b)(6)	(b)(6)
TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNStL	NAME OF COUNSEi.. ANO OR ORGA. I ZATION	,\OORESS;INO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
M EMBER SITTING	llON	GF.N	l JOTl!C	OTI IF.R	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x x x
x
1ss11r.s	A94.53	lOE\'. Nl'\IR f R	A67. JO	F:XlllBITS SUBMITTF:D TO TllE BOARD
J  ORDER APPOINTING 1 llE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCllAl\GE
3	LETTER Of NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF Of PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE '10 TllE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF Pl'RSONA I AP l'FARAN!'F
TAPE RIXORDING OF  PERSONALAPPEARANCE   IIEARING

11t- M l C OATt.:	CASE NIIMBER

04 Feb 20 15	FD-20 14-00304
APPLICANT 'S ISSI IE A.ND THE 1)0,\Rl)'S DECISIONAL RAl10NAI£ARE OIS\l!SSEO ON Tllf AIfA('HFO AIR FORCF, OISCllARGF Rf,VIEW BOARD DECISIONAi.RATIO\ Al E

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a persona l appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

(b)(6)

I

--

INDORStcM£NT	DATE:  2/!0/20 15
ro:	f'f<Q,\I:
SAF/MRBR	SECRt:TARY OFTllE A I R !"ORCE PtRSON'IEI.('Ol'NC'll.
AIK FOKCE OI SCllARvt:Kt:\ I[\\ 11(.JAKI>
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	15.15 cmtMANO DR, EE \\'ING.JRO FLOOR
Rr'\NDOLPll AFB, TX 781 50-4742	ANDREWS MB. MO 20762-1001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00304	

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.

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 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 perti nent standards of equity and propriety. The Applicant 's record of service included two Article l Ss and one Letter of Admonishment for failing to report to two appointments . His misconduct which resulted in Article l 5s included controlling a private vehicle while drunk, and disrespect in language toward a first lieutenant.

The applicant contends that when he separated, his separation order ind icated that he received an honorable discharge. The applicant's characterization was correctly reflected on his DD Form 214 as a general, but was not correct on his AF IMT 100. The Board noted the issue was result of administrative error at the time of discharge, and therefore did not negate his commander 's recommendation for his proposed discharge. 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 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