AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMlJER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE  GE	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OFCOUNSEi, AND OR ORGANIZATION	AJl DRESS A.'ID OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSCL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER   SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x
x x
ISSUES	A93.01	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TOTHE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING Tl IE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOl\RD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

MEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

19 May 2015	FD-2014-00352
APPLICA'.IT'S ISSUEANDIBBOOARD"S DECJSIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON TIIEATTACHBD A11t FORCf: DlSCHAAGE RBV1EW OOAAD DECJSIONALRAT'IONALE.

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.

(b) (6)

INOORSEMENT	DATE:   S/27/2015
1·0:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF TI!E AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE OISCliARG& REVIEW BOA.RD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND  DR.££  WING, JRD  FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AF8, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CAStNUMBtR

FD-2014-00352	

GENERAL:	The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge 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.

FINDING:	Upgrade  of the discharge, change of reason  and authority  for discharge,  and change of reenlistment code are denied.

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 pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant's record of service included two Letters of Counseling, two Letters of Reprimand, and two Article 15's for failure to report on time for official  appointment, failure to arrive for duty on time on divers occasions, making a false official statement to an NCO, failure to notify rater of his location, being late to mandatory fitness session, and drunk and disorderly conduct.

The applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when young and as a result of a trauma he had experienced.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 23 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature nor did he submit evidence of the trauma or its effects on him.  The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  The applicant stated he was told his
by his first sergeant that he would have a chance to re-enlist at a later time, therefore he did not challenge the discharge action.  The Board noted there is an issue with this common miscommunication , at the time of discharge, when the applicant is briefed that their discharge will automatically be upgraded  after six months. While a discharge may be upgraded after six months, the upgrade is by no means automatic.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant had graduated from college and is conducting himself as a good citizen.
However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing. The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

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, reason for the discharge or 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 detennines the discharge should remain unchanged .

Attachment: Examiner's Brief