AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVI EW BOARD H EARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE J\lEl\tBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
(b)(6)	(b)(6)
TYPI;   GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVI EW
COUNSEL	NAMEOF  COUNSEL   AND  ORORCA.NIZATION	Al)ORCSS AND OR ORGANIUTION or COUNSEL
\'ES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOA.RD
MEM BER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTH£R	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x

x x x
ISSUES	A85.07	INDEX NUMBE R	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITIEDTO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LEITER OF NOT IFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

10 Mar 2015	FD-2014-00386
APPLICANT·s ISSUE ANO lliE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE AITACHED AIR FORCE DISQ-IARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

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)

INDORSEMENT	DATE:  3/19/2015
TO'	f'ROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY Ot'TH.EAIR t'ORCE PERSON NEJ, COUNOL
AIR roRCE DISCHA.RCE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	tSJSCOMMAND OR,EE WING,JRD fJ,OOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDRE\VS  AFB,   MD  20162-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00386	

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.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record , the Board was unable to identify any 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 governmenta l 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 contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on only one minor infraction in an otherwise good record.  The records indicated the applicant received two administrative actions, one Article  15 for failure to go to duty on time and being incapacitated for duty as a result of wrongful previous alcohol overindulgence, and one Letter of Reprimand for being found guilty of driving under the influence and failing to notify leadership.  The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments.   The DRB opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.   They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.  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 concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case, and found no evidence to
ju stify 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